COMMITTEE OF MANAGEMENT Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WE have heard Sri Ateeq Ahmad Khan for the petitioner, Sri Neeraj Tiwari for the respondent No.3 and the learned State Counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 and 2.

(2.) BY this petition, the petitioner, which is the Committee of Management of Vaidya Yagya Dutt Sharma Ayurved Mahavidyalaya, Khurja, a college affiliated to the Chhatrapati Sahu Ji Maharaj University, Kanpur (hereinafter referred to as 'University'), has sought quashing of the order dated 15.9.2012 by which the University has constituted an Admission Committee for admission of candidates to the M.D/M.S (Ayurvedacharya) Courses conducted by various Colleges affiliated to it. In addition thereto, the petitioner has sought a mandamus commanding the University to complete the formalities in respect of the students who were selected by the Committee, appointed by the Director, Ayurvedic Sewayan, Govt. of U.P., Lucknow, for admission to the aforesaid courses conducted by the petitioner's college for the academic session 2012-13.

(3.) CHALLENGING the aforesaid action of the University, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that under Regulation 6(2) it is either the University or the Government concerned that can constitute a Committee for carrying out the admission process. Since the admission process was completed by the Selection Committee constituded by the Director of Ayurvedic Sewayan, Govt. of U.P., Lucknow, therefore, the University had no jurisdiction to further appoint a Committee so as to recommend candidates for admission to its college. Much reliance was placed on para 136 of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of P.A. Inamdar and Others v. State of Maharastra and Others reported in 2005 STPL (LE) 34824 SC = AIR 2005 SC 3228 = (2005) 6 SCC 537, so as to contend that the State is empowered to hold a test for selection through an agency and it is not always necessary to have a Common Entrance Test (CET). It was contended that as the State had already appointed a Committee for completing the admission process, and the admission process was completed by the said Committee, there was no justification for the University to appoint a fresh Committee for carrying out the admission process.