BOARD OF TRUSTEES, UNANI MEDICAL COLLEGE, ALLAHABAD AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS
LAWS(ALL)-1982-2-119
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Decided on February 18,1982

Board Of Trustees, Unani Medical College, Allahabad And Another Appellant
VERSUS
State of U.P. and others Respondents

JUDGEMENT

S.D.Agarwala, J. - (1.) The dispute in the present petition relates to the Unani Medical College, Allahabad. By means of the present petition the order of the State Government dated 29th of July, 1981 appointing as Authorised Controller has been challenged. This Unani Medical College has been established with the object of imparting knowledge of Unani system of medicine on modern lines. The college is affiliated to the University of Kanpur and the provisions of U. V. State Universities Act, 1973, hereinafter referred to as the Act, are applicable to the College.
(2.) We have heard Shri Jagdish Swarup on behalf of the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel on behalf of the respondents, Shri Jagdish Swarup raised two contention before us. His first contention is that the Unani Medical College is a minority institution and as such it is protected by Article 30 of the Constitution of India and, consequently, no Authorised Controller can be appointed under section 59 of the Act. The second contention is that the order appointing an Authorised Controller in manifestly erroneous 1 as the case does not come in any of the clauses mentioned in section 57 of the Act. He has further urged that the order is in violation of the principle of natural justice as the copy of the report dated 18th December, 1950, submitted by the Deputy Director, Ayurvedic Unani (Education) U.P. Lucknow was not supplied to the petitioner.
(3.) After hearing parties counsel for sometime, since the petition as well as counter-affidavit did not contain the entire relevant record to determine the question with regard to the fact as to whether the college was a minority institution or not, Shri Jagdish Swarup, learned counsel for the petitioner did not press this question and left the question open for some further date if and when it was necessary for the petitioner to urge, particularly in view of the fact on the second question we were in favour of the petitioner.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.