 Online edition of India's National Newspaper Tuesday, Dec 23, 2008 ePaper | Mobile/PDA Version |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Tamil Nadu |
|
News:
ePaper |
Front Page |
National |
Tamil Nadu |
Andhra Pradesh |
Karnataka |
Kerala |
New Delhi |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Engagements |
Advts: Retail Plus | Classifieds | Jobs | Obituary |
Tamil Nadu
CHENNAI: It has been repeatedly held by the Supreme Court that the power under Article 226 is to be exercised to ensure that the statutory regime is followed, and the same is not abrogated, the Madras High Court has said. The apex court, in several cases, has held that in matters relating to elections, the statutory remedy should be followed, a Division Bench, comprising the then Chief Justice A.K.Ganguly and Justice K.Chandru, said in its common judgment while allowing appeals preferred by Bharathiar University, Coimbatore and another person. The appeals challenged a single judge’s order, allowing a writ petition in which a dispute was raised relating to election of members of the university Syndicate from the Senate constituency. The Bench said such an election was controlled by the provisions of the Bharathiar University Act. The dispute raised fell within the categories of disputes enumerated under Section 50 of the legislation, namely, whether a person was entitled to be a member of any authority of the university. But, the petition was filed without exhausting the remedy statutorily provided under the Act. It was open to the petitioner to raise a dispute under the provision before the Vice-Chancellor with a prayer to refer it to the Chancellor for a decision. Without doing this the petition had been filed and the impugned judgment delivered. Therefore, the specific statutory remedy had not been exhausted in this case, the Bench said. It was, no doubt, true that the existence of a statutory remedy did not oust the jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution. Such a remedy merely operated as a restraint on the exercise of discretion by the court in granting remedy under Article 226. The apex court had carved out several situations where despite the existence of a statutory remedy a writ petition could be entertained. Such situations were not available in the present case, the Bench said, setting aside the single judge’s order. It was now open to the varsityy to take steps for holding elections in accordance with law, it said.
Printer friendly
page
News:
ePaper |
Front Page |
National |
Tamil Nadu |
Andhra Pradesh |
Karnataka |
Kerala |
New Delhi |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Engagements |
|
|
|
The Hindu Group: Home | About Us | Copyright | Archives | Contacts | Subscription Group Sites: The Hindu | The Hindu ePaper | Business Line | Business Line ePaper | Sportstar | Frontline | Publications | eBooks | Images | Ergo | Home |
Copyright © 2008, The
Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of
this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of
The Hindu
|