Shakeel Ahmad v. Magadh University, Bodh Gaya And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Letters Patent Appeal No.129 of 2017 IN Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 18112 of 2016 ===========================================================

1. Shakeel Ahmad, Son of Late Mohammad Yusuf, resident of Mohalla B - 24, Enayat Colony, Bari Road Gola, P.S. Civil Line, District - Gaya .... .... Appellant/s

Versus

1. Magadh University, Bodh Gaya through its Vice - Chancellor, Magadh University, Bodh - Gaya

2. The Hon'ble Chancellor, Bihar State Universities, Raj Bhawan, Patna

3. Registrar, Magadh University, Bodh - Gaya

4. Branch Manager, UCO Bank, White House Compound, Gaya

5. Branch Manager, Canara Bank, Swarajpuri, Gaya

6. State Bank of India, A.P. Colony, Gaya .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s : Mr. Ray Shivaji Nath, Mr. Saurabh Nath Mr. Alok Anand, Advocates For the University : Dr. K.N. Singh, Mr. Vipin Kumar, Advocates For U.B.I. Mr. Ranjeet Kr. Pandey, Advocate For S.B.I. Mrs. Namrata Mishra, Advocate =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR SINGH ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) Date: 15-05-2017 In the matter of working of a minority Institute situated in the district of Gaya, the Magadh University on direction from the Hon'ble Chancellor of the University constituted a committee to cause certain enquiry and submit a report.

Challenging the said action of the University, the writ petition was filed and the learned Writ Court found that keeping in

Patna High Court LPA No.129 of 2017 dt.15-05-2017 2/2 view the interest of the students and the complaints received, if the Chancellor had issued the direction to the University, the learned Writ Court does not find any reason to interfere with the discretion exercised by the Chancellor and the consequential action taken by the University and dismissed the writ petition. We also find no reason to make indulgence into the matter. Complaints were received before the Chancellor on the functioning of the Institute in question and the Chancellor called for a report and for the same the University has taken action and in doing so, as held by the learned Writ Court, no error has been committed by the University warranting re-consideration or interference.

The appeal is, therefore, dismissed.

(Rajendra Menon, CJ) (Sudhir Singh, J) K.C.jha/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N/A Uploading Date 20.5.2017 Transmission Date N/A