TrendingVideosIndia
Opinions | CommentEditorialsThe MiddleLetters to the EditorReflections
Sports
State | Himachal PradeshPunjabJammu & KashmirHaryanaChhattisgarhMadhya PradeshRajasthanUttarakhandUttar Pradesh
City | ChandigarhAmritsarJalandharLudhianaDelhiPatialaBathindaShaharnama
World | United StatesPakistan
Diaspora
Features | The Tribune ScienceTime CapsuleSpectrumIn-DepthTravelFood
Business | My MoneyAutoZone
News Columns | Kashmir AngleJammu JournalInside the CapitalHimachal CallingHill View
Don't Miss
Advertisement

High Court of Himachal Pradesh dismisses plea against VC’s appointment

The High Court of Himachal has dismissed a petition challenging the appointment of Sat Prakash Bansal as Vice-Chancellor of the Central University of Himachal Pradesh. - File photo

Unlock Exclusive Insights with The Tribune Premium

Take your experience further with Premium access. Thought-provoking Opinions, Expert Analysis, In-depth Insights and other Member Only Benefits
Yearly Premium ₹999 ₹349/Year
Yearly Premium $49 $24.99/Year
Advertisement

The High Court of Himachal has dismissed a petition challenging the appointment of Sat Prakash Bansal as Vice-Chancellor of the Central University of Himachal Pradesh.

Advertisement

Justice Bipin Chander Negi, while dismissing the petition, observed that “before a citizen can claim a writ of quo warranto , the petitioner has to satisfy the court that the office in question is a public office. Other than the aforesaid, the court has to be satisfied that a usurper is holding the said public office without legal authority.”

Advertisement

The petitioner alleged that Bansal’s appointment had not been made in accordance with the University Grants Commission Regulations, 2010. On the other hand, Deputy Solicitor General Balram Sharma, representing the central university, raised the issue of the maintainability of the petition and the locus of the petitioner.

After hearing the matter, the court observed that “it is evident that the petitioner, in the case at hand, is a retired person and a resident of Noida, Uttar Pradesh. Other than the aforesaid, nothing has been stated in the petition, justifying the interest of the petitioner in the appointment of the Vice-Chancellor.

The court said that “nothing has been pointed out in the petition to show that he has some interest in the matter. Other than the aforesaid, the petitioner has placed no material on record to substantiate his bona fide in filing the present case. Therefore, the petition is held to be not maintainable at the behest of the petitioner. Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed.”

Advertisement

Advertisement
Show comments
Advertisement