SARDAR PATEL UNIVERSITY Vs. CHARUTAR VIDYA MANDAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent Act, the appellant i.e. Sardar Patel University is challenging the legality and validity of the order dtd. 6/9/2021 passed by the learned Single Judge in Special Civil Application No. 7770 of 2021.

(2.) The case of the petitioner is that the respondent - institution addressed a letter on 30/3/2021 to the appellant - University, interalia informing that respondent - institution has nominated its two representatives namely one Shri Manish S. Patel - Vice President and Shri Mehulbhai Dineshchandra Patel - for being members of the Syndicate of the appellant - University. While responding to the said communication of the respondent - institution, the appellant - University vide its reply dtd. 19/4/2021 informed to conduct election of the representatives as required by Clause (f) of sub-sec. (1) of Sec. 22 of the Sardar Patel University Act, 1955 (for short the 'Act'). According to the appellant - University, this communication followed by subsequent communication dtd. 25/4/2021, reflecting on page 102 has given rise to the filing of the petition by the respondent - institution. According to the appellant though the petition was not maintainable in view of the statutory remedy being available under Sec. 59 of the Act, the learned Single Judge by the impugned order dtd. 6/9/2021 was pleased to allow the petition by quashing and setting the impugned communications as referred to above and it is against this order passed by the learned Single Judge, the appellant has preferred the present Letters Patent Appeal.

(3.) Shri Kamal Trivedi, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Sudhanshu A. Jha, learned advocate appearing for the appellant - University has, at the outset fairly conceded that the view adopted by the learned Single Judge insofar as its communication dtd. 19/4/2021, is not possible to be assailed in view of the fact that though provisions required by virtue of Sec. 22(1) Clause (f), two representatives elected by the Charutar Vidhya Mandal, but the approved Regulations and Rules of Charutar Vidhya Mandal which are in existence right from inception, instead of electing two representatives, nomination can be made by the respondent - institution by virtue of Clause (l) of Regulation 5, as is reflecting on page 82A and that being so, he has fairly stated before the Court that the impugned communication to the effect that the election to Syndicate to be conducted by the University is not possible to be agitated and qua that the order under challenge is not assailable.