RAM SINGH SAINI versus H. N. BHARGAVA

RAM SINGH SAINI versus H. N. BHARGAVA

The requirement that a teaching post be readvertised if not filled within one year of the Selection Committee's recommendation is mandatory, not directory. Appointment without readvertisement after this period is invalid. The statute is within the rule-making power conferred by section 31(aa) of the Act.

Parties
Appellant: Ram Singh Saini; Respondent: H. N. Bhargava
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
28 July 1975
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave From Madhya Pradesh High Court Judgment Dated 9 July 1973
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Statute Interpretation, Appointment to Teaching Posts, University Statutes, Mandatory Vs Directory Provisions, Rule Making Powers

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ram Singh Saini

Appellant

H. N. Bhargava

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave From Madhya Pradesh High Court Judgment Dated 9 July 1973

  1. 1 Whether the statute requiring readvertisement of the post after one year is mandatory or directory
  2. 2 Whether the statute is beyond the rule-making power conferred by section 31(aa) of the Saugar University Act
  3. 3 Whether the writ issued was appropriate given the nature of the office

Ratio Decidendi

The requirement that a teaching post be readvertised if not filled within one year of the Selection Committee's recommendation is mandatory, not directory. Appointment without readvertisement after this period is invalid. The statute is within the rule-making power conferred by section 31(aa) of the Act.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • No order as to costs