COMMITTEE OF MANAGEMENT Vs. YOGENDRA SINGH
LAWS(ALL)-2013-9-102
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Decided on September 30,2013

COMMITTEE OF MANAGEMENT Appellant
VERSUS
YOGENDRA SINGH Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

ABDUL GHAFFAR AND ANOTHER VS. ISHTIYAQ AHMAD AND OTHERS [REFERRED TO]
KESHAV TRIPATHI VS. STAE OF U. P. AND OTHERS [REFERRED TO (ALL) AND]
SURYA DEO MISHRA VS. STATE OF U. P. AND OTHERS [REFERRED TO]
HARISH CHANDRA SRIVASTVA VS. STATE OF U. P. AND OTHERS [REFERRED TO (DB);]
S.L. BATHLA VS. STATE BANK OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
HOSHNAK SINGH VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
RAMJI DWIVEDI VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
SARGUJA TRANSPORT SERVICE VS. STATE TRANSPORT APPELLATE TRIBUNAL M P GWALIOR [REFERRED TO]
SAHIB RAM VS. STATE OF HARYANA [REFERRED TO;]
C JACOB VS. DIRECTOR OF GEOLOGY ALIAS MINING [REFERRED TO]
BAIJ NATH SINGH VS. STATE OF U P [REFERRED TO]
NIRANJAN RAI VS. DISTRICT INSPECTOR OF SCHOOL GHAZIPUR [REFERRED TO]
KHACHER SINGH VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [REFERRED TO]
GURU CHARAN LAL SRIVASTAVA VS. HINDUSTAN AERONAUTICS LTD [REFERRED TO]
L.S. TRIPATHI VS. BANARAS HINDU UNIVERSITY AND OTHERS [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

- (1.)This appeal has been filed by the appellants against the order of learned Single Judge dated 23.4.2013 by which a very innocuous order of deciding representation has been given.
There is some delay in filing the appeal which has been explained in the affidavit.

Ground is that the present appellants who were respondent Nos. 6 and 7 in the writ petition were not noticed and they had no information/intimation about the writ petition. They only came to know about the order when notices were given by the educational authorities to them to appear and prove certain facts.

(2.)Argument is that in the garb of innocuous order of deciding the representation, here is a case where the frivolous and stale claim of the writ petitioners has been permitted to be reopened and the validly elected Committee of Management on account of political influence in the garb of verifying correct facts is in serious threat of harassment and the great injustice.
(3.)Argument is that in normal situation the direction as claimed may be innocuous and that may be given but if a party comes to this Court and demonstrates that either the claim is not triable or that is frivolous or that is stale and that is capable of just causing the injury and harassment to the other side then that exercise is either not to be done or if the direction has been given that is to be withdrawn.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.