Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR AT IMPHAL
D.KRISHNAKUMAR, GOLMEI GAIPHULSHILLU KABUI
Bhabeswar Tongbram – Appellant
Versus
Khaidem Joychandra Singh – Respondent
ORDER :
D. Krishnakumar, C.J.
1. Mr. S.D. Singh, learned counsel assisted by Mr. Tondon Thokchom, learned counsel, appears for the appellants; Mr. M. Devananda, learned Additional Advocate General assisted by Ms. N. Jyotsana, learned counsel, appears for the State of Manipur; Mr. S. Jasobanta, learned counsel, appears for the UGC and Dr. RK Deepak, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. T. Dennis, learned counsel, appears for the MTU. Heard also Mr. N. Jotendro, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. Murtaza Ahmed, learned counsel, appears for the respondent No. 1 in WA No. 16 of 2023.
2. The preliminary objection has been raised by the counsel for the appellant regarding the maintainability of the writ petition on the ground that the prayer sought for in the writ petition is Certioriari. Since the appointment of the appellant is Vice-Chancellor of the Manipur Technical University, the said Writ of Certiorari is not maintainable.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the parties has fairly agreed that the prayer sought for by the petitioner in the writ petitions has not been decided by the learned Single Judge.
4. To sum up, whether the prayer sought for in the writ petition of Certiorari fo
A writ of certiorari seeking to quash the appointment of a sitting Vice-Chancellor is not maintainable, necessitating a fresh examination of the legal submissions by the learned Single Judge.
The court established that the Minister's restrictions on the petitioner's powers as Vice-Chancellor were illegal and arbitrary, violating the provisions of the Manipur Technical University Act, 2016....
The importance of faculty for the university and the interest of the students influenced the court's decision to set aside the interim order and allow the declaration of results for the recruitment p....
A litigant invoking PIL jurisdiction must approach the court with clean hands and disclose all relevant facts. Failure to do so may result in the dismissal of the action without examining the merits ....
(1) Writ of Quo warranto – Writ of quo warranto can be issued where an appointment has not been made in accordance with law – Quo warranto is directed to such person who is required to show by what a....
First choice in Section 13(7) of “Act” is Vice Chancellor of any other University in Kerala; and admittedly, all such persons are fully qualified in terms of both experience and educational qualifica....
Alternative remedies do not bar the maintainability of writ petitions under Article 226, especially in cases involving fundamental rights or jurisdictional issues.
The court retains jurisdiction to examine the merits of a public interest litigation challenging an appointment, even after the resignation of the individual involved renders the specific writ moot.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
