TIKA RAM versus MUNDIKOTA SHIKSHAN PRASARAK MANDAL & ORS.

TIKA RAM versus MUNDIKOTA SHIKSHAN PRASARAK MANDAL & ORS.

A writ petition under Article 226 is maintainable where the relief is sought against a government officer's order in a quasi-judicial proceeding, even if arising under non-statutory rules; the Director had no power to review his earlier quasi-judicial order, thus the review order is void.

Parties
Appellant: Tika Ram; Respondent No. 1: Mundjkota Shikshan Prasarak Mandal
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
10 August 1984
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave From High Court Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Judicial Review Under Article 226, Quasi Judicial Proceedings, Jurisdiction of Government Officers, Nature of School Code Rules
Constitutional Law Education Law Judicial Review Under Article 226 Quasi Judicial Proceedings Jurisdiction of Government Officers Nature of School Code Rules

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tika Ram

Appellant

Mundjkota Shikshan Prasarak Mandal

Respondent No. 1

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave From High Court Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a writ petition under Article 226 is maintainable against the order of a government officer enforcing non-statutory School Code rules in relation to a private body.
  2. 2 Whether the Director and Deputy Director of Education have the power to review their own quasi-judicial orders under the School Code.

Ratio Decidendi

A writ petition under Article 226 is maintainable where the relief is sought against a government officer's order in a quasi-judicial proceeding, even if arising under non-statutory rules; the Director had no power to review his earlier quasi-judicial order, thus the review order is void.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • The order dated November 26, 1976 passed by the Director of Education is set aside.
  • The order dated October 3, 1975 passed by the Deputy Director of Education remanding the case for a fresh enquiry is restored.