IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Rajiv Sahai Endlaw, J.
Punjabi University - Appellant
Versus
Union of India - Respondent
W.P. (C) 6008 of 2011
Decided On : 19-08-2011
JUDGMENT
Rajiv Sahai Endlaw, J.
1. The Court is called upon to exercise the power of judicial review over the decision of the respondents Union of India (UOI) and Association of Indian Universities (AIU) of conferring the Maulana Abul Kalam Azad (MAKA) trophy, to be given to overall top performing university in Inter University Tournaments of the preceding year, for the year 2009-2010 to the respondent no.3 Guru Nanak Dev University. The petitioner claims that the petitioner and not the respondent no.3 Guru Nanak Dev University is the overall top performing university in Inter University Tournaments for the year 2009-2010.
2. The Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports (MYAS) in the guidelines for selection for the said trophy has provided:
(i) For AIU to invite applications and claims from all Universities and to prepare a statement of marks by a stipulated date; no claim from any University/College beyond stipulated cut-off date is to be entertained;
(ii) For AIU to scrutinize the applications, compute and prepare a statement of marks with the help of members from Indian Olympic Association (IOA), Sports Authority of India (SAI) and prominent sports persons/Arjuna Awardees/Padma Shree having knowledge of university sports;
(iii) For AIU to submit statement of marks and other relevant records before the Selection Committee constituted by MYAS;
(iv) For the Selection Committee to recommend to MYAS a list of three Universities ranking top in sports for award of trophy for the preceding year;
(v) For the Selection Committee to consist of, an eminent sportsperson as Chairperson and of three Olympians, three Arjuna Awardees, three Dronacharya Awardees as members and with Deputy Secretary (Sports) as Member Secretary;
(vi) For the university securing the first position to be conferred the trophy and a cash prize of Rs.10 lacs;
(vii) For the calculation of marks to be done based on marks criteria provided;
(viii) For negative marks for wrong claims and wrong complaints;
(ix) For MYAS to announce the winner of the award of the trophy;
(x) For the decision of the Government to be final and binding on all.
3. MYAS, vide its letter dated 26th August, 2010 intimated of the selection of the petitioner for the MAKA Trophy for the year 2008-2009 and selection of respondent no.3 Guru Nanak Dev University for the MAKA Trophy for the year 2009-2010.
4. The petitioner earlier filed W.P.(C) No.5803/2010 in this Court impugning the decision for award of MAKA Trophy for the year 2009-2010 to the respondent no.3 Guru Nanak Dev University. It was the claim of the petitioner that while computing its marks, 4775+6749 marks had been wrongfully deducted.
5. This Court while disposing of the said writ petition vide judgment dated 4th March, 2011 observed that it did not wish to examine the details of the claims made by the petitioner but prima facie found that there was no rational basis for deducting the marks relating to yachting event in the computation of marks of the petitioner. The petitioner had claimed wrongful deduction for sports of not only Yachting but also Kabaddi, Asian Roller Sports and Tug of War. Accordingly, the question of computation of marks was referred back to the Selection Committee which had earlier taken the decision in the meeting held on 14th August, 2010. It was further directed that re-computation of marks in relation to the aforesaid four events be not restricted to the petitioner only but be undertaken for all the Universities that made a claim for MAKA Trophy for the year 2009-2010. The Selection Committee was accordingly directed to undertake the exercise and meet within ten days of the order and the final decision on the MAKA Trophy for the year 2009-2010 was directed to be announced within two weeks thereafter. Liberty was given to the party remaining aggrieved to seek appropriate remedies in law. The Trophy in the meanwhile was directed to be kept with MYAS till it announced its decision relating to the year 20
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.