Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Gour Mohan Sachin Mandal Mahavidyalaya ... vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors.) on 27 January, 2015
Author: Dipankar Datta
Bench: Dipankar Datta
-: 1 : -
33
27.01 2015
rrc
W. P. 3040 (W) of 2015
(Student Federation of India, Bireswarpur College Unit,
Gour Mohan Sachin Mandal Mahavidyalaya & Anr. Vs.
The State of West Bengal & Ors.)
Mr. Uday Sankar Chattopadhyay
Mr. Santanu Maji
......For the petitioners
Mr. Subhabrata Datta
Mr. Benazir Ahmed
.......For the State
Ms. Sampa Sarkar
.......For the University
This writ petition is at the instance of a registered students'
organization and its secretary. It is directed against an election
scheduled to be held on 28th January, 2015 to constitute the students'
union of Gour Mohan Sachin Mandal Mahavidyalaya, affiliated to the
University of Calcutta.
Prayer (b) of the writ petition is that direction ought to issue on
the respondents to allow the petitioner no. 1 to participate in the
students election.
Having considered such prayer, I am of the view that the petitioner no. 1 cannot contest the election; its members of course may have the right to participate in the election in accordance with law.
It is only on the ground of such defective prayer that this writ petition is liable to be dismissed; however, I do not wish to rest the
-: 2 : -
order of dismissal only on this ground since there is a further worthy ground for the same.
My attention has been drawn to a decision of a co-ordinate Bench reported in 2012 (5) CHN (Cal) 78 (Aditya Ghosh Vs. University of Calcutta). In paragraph 28 of the report, the co-ordinate Bench held while considering a similar writ petition that the same did not involve public law element and therefore, a writ petition would not be maintainable. It is true that despite such observation, the co-ordinate Bench proceeded to make certain directions as would appear from paragraph 31 of the report but such directions must have been issued bearing in mind the necessities of such writ petition and, with respect, are not binding on this Bench. Paragraph 28 contains the Court's finding on a legal point, which only is binding. I also share the view expressed by another co-ordinate Bench in the decision reported in 2005 (4) CHN 68 (Himadri Sekhar Biswas & Ors. Vs. Behala College & Ors.) that a writ petition against actions taken to fulfil an obligation cast on the basis of any non-statutory document would not be maintainable.
Since this writ petition also does not involve any public law element, it stands dismissed, without costs.
Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties as expeditiously as possible.
( Dipankar Datta, J. )