Ram Naresh Pandey v. The State Of Bihar And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.15391 of 2015 =========================================================== Ram Naresh Pandey son of Late Shiv Pujan Pandey, The Secretary Managing Committee of Shree Banbhat Sanskrit College, Mahrauli, Sakari Khurd, P.S. - Palasi, District - Arwal.
.... .... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary, Department of Education, Government of Bihar, New Secretariat, Patna.
2. The Principal Secretary, Education Department, Government of Bihar, New Secretariat, Patna.
3. The Joint Secretary to the Government, Education Department Government of Bihar, New Secretariat, Patna.
4. The Deputy Secretary to the Government, Education Department, Government of Bihar, New Secretariat, Patna.
5. The Director, Higher Education Department, Government of Bihar, New Secretariat, Patna.
6. Kameshwar Singh Darbhanga Sanskrit University, Darbhanga through its Registrar.
7. The Vice Chancellor, Kameshwar Singh Darbhanga Sanskrit University, Darbhanga.
8. The Registrar/In-Charge Registrar, Kameshwar Singh Darbhanga Sanskrit University, Darbhanga.
9. The Examination Controller, Kameshwar Singh Darbhanga Sanskrit University, Darbhanga.
.... .... Respondents =========================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner :
Mr. Binod Kumar, Advocate For the State :
Smt. Nivedita Nirvikar, G.A.10 For the University :
Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 10-03-2016 The requirements in terms of the statute dated 19.04.1986 will have to be fulfilled because the institution was set-up prior to the notification. It is made clear that the petitioner is looking for recognition in the present days and not with regard to 1976 position as it stood then.
Since the time does not stand still nor will requirements
Patna High Court CWJC No.15391 of 2015 dt.10-03-2016 2 / 2 which are required to be fulfilled by any institution, seeking recognition, the writ is more for the purposes of getting funding from the State rather than for any serious effort to impart education. Writ is dismissed.
It is left open to the petitioner to bring about the changed standards of the infrastructure and facilities and apply again. (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.) Sanjay/- U