PROFESSOR (DR.) SREEJITH P.S v. DR. RAJASREE M.S & Ors.
Case at a glance
Outcome
Allowed
The writ petition is allowed
Provisions considered
- University Act, 2015 s. 13(4)
- Constitution of India art. 254
- University Grants Commission Act, 1956 s. 26
- SPU Act, 1955
- UGC Act, 1956 ss. 26, 26(1)(e), 26(1)(g)
- APJ Abdul Kalam Technological University Act, 2015 s. 13
Judgment
1.5 The impugned judgment(s) and order(s) passed by the Division Bench of the High Court as well as that of the learned Single Judge dismissing the writ petition and refusing to issue the writ of quo warranto declaring the appointment of respondent No. 1 as Vice Chancellor of the APJ Abdul Kalam Technological University, Thiruvananthapuram as bad in law and/or illegal and void ab initio are hereby quashed and set aside. The writ petition is allowed. There shall be a writ of quo warranto declaring the appointment of the respondent No. 1 as Vice Chancellor of the APJ Abdul Kalam Technological University, Thiruvananthapuram as void ab initio and consequently, the appointment of respondent No. 1 as Vice Chancellor of the APJ Abdul Kalam Technological University, Thiruvananthapuram is quashed and set aside. [Para 9][272-E-F]
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: The writ petition is allowed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
University Act, 2015 — s. 13(4); Constitution of India — art. 254; University Grants Commission Act, 1956 — s. 26; SPU Act, 1955; UGC Act, 1956 — ss. 26, 26(1)(e), 26(1)(g); APJ Abdul Kalam Technological University Act, 2015 — s. 13.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.