DR. UDAI PRATAP SINGH v. THE CHANCELLOR UNIVERSITY TO LKO AND 4 OTHERS
WRIA/5171/2025 · 2025-05-14
Rajesh Singh Chauhan
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 139497 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 139497 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:28137 Court No. - 3 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 5171 of 2025 Petitioner :- Dr. Udai Pratap Singh Respondent :- The Chancellor University To Lko And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Meenakshi Singh Parihar,Abhiuday Pratap Singh Counsel for Respondent :- Rajesh Tewari,Anurag Kumar Singh Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.
1. Heard Sri H.G.S. Parihar, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Ms. Meenakshi Singh Parihar, Sri Rajesh Tewari, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 1, Sri Anurag Kumar Singh,
learned counsel for the opposite party nos. 2 to 5. 2. Sri Parihar has filed supplementary affidavit, second supplementary affidavit and impleadment application, the same are taken on record. 3. By means of the impleadment application, Sri Parihar has paryed that Dr. Keya Pandey, Professor and Former Head of Department of Anthropology, University of Lucknow and Director, Directorate of Tribal Development, U.P., Lucknow be impleaded as opposite party nos. 6 and 7. 4. Sri Shashank Bhasin, Advocate has filed application for intervention on behalf of Dr. Keya Pandey along with vakalatnama, the same are also taken on record. 5. Sri Rishi Raj, Advocate has filed application for impleadment along with vakalatnama seeking impleadment of Sri Shailesh Kumar Shukla, the erstwhile Vice Chancellor of the University, the same are taken on record. 6. By means of this petition, the petitioner has prayed the following relief:-
"i. issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the decision taken by the Executive Council, University of Lucknow for initiating disciplinary proceeding against the petitioner as mentioned at serial no. 18 of the minutes of meeting dated 10.03.2025, as contained in Annexure No. 1 to this Writ Petition. ii. issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the inquiry committee report submitted against the petitioner, as mentioned at serial no. 18 of the minutes of meeting of Executive Council (Annexure No. 1), after summoning the same from the opposite parties. iii. issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite parties not to initiate disciplinary proceeding against the petitioner in pursuance to the inquiry committee report and the decision taken by the Execution Council on 10.03.2025."
7. At the very outset, Sri Rajesh Tiwari, learned counsel for the chancellor has drawn attention of this Court towards Annexure No. 20, which is a statutory reference of the petitioner dated 07.04.2025, whereby, the petitioner has requested to:
1. Abolish the newly formed Disciplinary Committee against me, as resolved in the Executive Council meeting held on March 10, 2025. 2. Review and nullify the final report of the Inquiry Committee (2019-2023) due to its biased composition, procedural irregularities, and violation of natural justice. 3. Constitute an independent, neutral committee to investigate the mental harassment I endured from 2019 to 2023 and recommend appropriate relief as per university statutes and legal provisions. 8.
The copy of the statutory reference has been provided to the Chancellor/Chairman of the Executive Council, Lucknow University on 11.04.2025 (Annexure No.21). Sri Tiwari has stated that when the statutory alternative remedy has already been availed by the petitioner, this petition may not be maintained at this stage. On being asked from Sri Tiwari, as to whether any decision has been taken on such reference of the petitioner, Sri Tiwari has stated that presently he has got no specific instruction on that, but if any order had been passed, the copy thereof would have been served upon the petitioner. Therefore, perhaps that reference would be still pending for decision. He has further submitted that if any decision has already been taken on the aforesaid reference, the decision thereof shall be intimated to the petitioner, forthwith, and if no decision has been taken, the decision shall be taken promptly. 9. Having considered the submission of the learned counsels for the parties, I do not find any purpose to allow the implement application so filed by the petitioner; an application for
intervention filed by Sri Shashank Bhasin and application for implement filed by Sri Rishi Raj. Therefore, those applications are rejected at this stage for the simple reason that the statutory reference of the petitioner is pending consideration before the chancellor and until any decision is taken by the chancellor on the reference of the petitioner dated 07.04.2025, those parties are having no locus to address this Court. 10. Therefore, without entering into the merits of the issue, I hereby dispose of this petition finally at the admission stage giving liberty to the petitioner to prefer a fresh representation to the opposite party no.
1 enclosing therewith the copy of the earlier reference dated 07.04.2025 and other relevant documents which are necessary for the disposal of the aforesaid statutory reference within a period of 15 days from today and if such reference is preferred by the petitioner, it is expected from the opposite party no. 1 to consider and dispose of the aforesaid reference strictly in accordance with law by speaking and reasoned order by affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and other parties, if it is so required, with expedition, preferably, within a period of six weeks from the production of certified copy of the order of this Court and decision thereof shall be intimated to the petitioner forthwith. 11. It is needless to say that till the disposal of the aforesaid reference, no date to conduct the departmental enquiry may be fixed. However, it is also needless to say that if any decision has already been taken on the reference of the petitioner dated 07.04.2025, the same maybe communicated to the petitioner forthwith and in that case, the consequential exercises may be undertaken strictly in accordance with law. 12. The writ petition is disposed of finally in the aforesaid terms.
Order Date :- 14.5.2025 Anurag Digitally signed by :- ANURAG SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench