- (1.) Heard Sri Adarsh Bhushan, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.1 and 4, Sri H.N. Singh, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Vikas Tiwari, learned counsel for respondent No.5 and Sri Ved Byas Mishra, learned counsel for respondent Nos.2 and 3.
(2.) At the very out set, learned Senior Counsel for the respondent No.5 raised preliminary objection in regard to maintainability of the writ petition in view of the availability of alternative remedy to file reference before the Chancellor under Section 68 of U.P. State Universities Act in view of the fact that impugned order is passed by the Vice Chancellor of the Sampurnand Sanskrit University.
(3.) In regard to preliminary objection raised by learned counsel for the respondent, submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that in case the order is in violation of principles of natural justice and without jurisdiction, the writ petition is maintainable and alternative remedy is not barred. In support of his submission, he placed reliance upon a judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Whirlpool Corporation Vs. Registrar of Trade Marks, Mumbai and others [1998 (8) SCC 1].;