IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/WRIT PETITION (PIL) (WRIT PETITION (PIL)) NO. 1 of 2026 ==========================================================

YATRIK KETANBHAI PATEL Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.

==========================================================

Appearance:

MR ISA HAKIM(10874) for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MS. HETAL PATEL, AGP for the Opponent(s) No. 1,2 VIKAS V NAIR(7444) for the Opponent(s) No. 3,4 ========================================================== CORAM:HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE SUNITA AGARWAL and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.N.RAY Date : 19/01/2026

ORAL ORDER

(PER : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE SUNITA AGARWAL)

1. Mr.Vikas V.Nair, learned advocate has put in appearance for the respondent No.3-University.

2. This is a wholly misconceived petition filed in the nature of the Public Interest Litigation by a student of Political Science at the Surendranagar University, who claims to be a public - spirited citizen superheading the social cause of the Youth in public and private universities. Even the course of study wherein the petitioner is stated to have been admitted in the concerned University, has not been disclosed in the writ petition. Moreover, the prayer made in the writ petition is to the issuance of a writ of quo warranto to remove the respondent No.4 who has been appointed as In-charge Registrar of the respondent No.3 – Gujarat University, the date of whose appointment has not been disclosed in the writ petition.

3. The basis of filing of the present petition is the RTI application moved by the petitioner seeking details of an appointment of the respondent No.4 as In-charge Registrar of the University. The statutory provisions are sought to be placed before us to submit that only a Deputy Registrar of the University can be put on the post as the In-charge Registrar.

4. In these facts and scenario, we have raised a pointed query to the learned Counsel for the petitioner about the locus of the petitioner to seek a writ of quo warranto when the appointment to the post is of an officer of the University who has been placed In-charge of the office of the Registrar of the University, as a stop-gap arrangement. No plausible reply could be given by the learned Counsel for the petitioner apart from the plea of violation of the statutory provision as to who can be given charge of the office of the Registrar of the University, therein.

4. No prejudice otherwise could be said to have been caused to be petitioner or any member of public, for the administrative arrangement made by the University. The petitioner claiming to be a student has proceeded to file the present Public Interest Litigation even without disclosing his credentials, such as; name of the course, the Scholar number or other relevant details so to ascertain his bonafide. As per own statement of the petitioner, he has not approached the competent authority by writing any written representation and straightway proceeded to file this present petition on the basis of an RTI application moved by him on 04.08.2025. We highly doubt the bonafide of the petitioner to maintain this Public Interest Litigation.

5. The present petition filed in the nature of Public Interest Litigation is accordingly, dismissed as misconceived though without costs. (SUNITA AGARWAL, CJ )

(D.N.RAY,J)

BINA SHAH