Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 61 (4.72 seconds)
Documents citing D. A. V. College Etc vs State Of Punjab & Ors on 5 May, 1971

The Ahmedabad St. Xaviers College ... vs State Of Gujarat & Anr on 26 April, 1974

3 06 In D. A. Y. College vs. State of Punjab,(1) this Court struck down cl. 17 of the statutes which provided that the staff initially appointed should be approved by the Vice-Chancellor and that all subsequent changes should be referred to the University for the Vice Chancellor's approval. However, Reddy J., speaking for the unanimous Court, observed :
Supreme Court of India Cites 153 - Cited by 397 - A N Ray - Full Document

T.M.A.Pai Foundation & Ors vs State Of Karnataka & Ors on 31 October, 2002

In the second case of D.A.V. College v. State of Punjab reported in (1971) Supp. SCR 688 the Dayanand Anglo Vedic College Trust was formed to perpetuate the memory of the founder of the Arya Samaj. It ran various institutions in the country. The collages managed and administered by the Trust were, before the Punjab Reorganisation Act, affiliated to the Punjab University. After the reorganisation of the State of Punjab in 1969, the Punjab Legislative passed the Guru Nank University (Amritsar) Act (21 of 1969). Colleges in the districts specified ceased to be affiliated to the Punjab University and were to be associated with and admitted to the privileges of the new university. Sub-section (2) of Section 4 of the Act provided that the university "shall make provision for study and research on the life and teaching of Guru Nanka and their cultural and religious impact in the context of Indian and World Civilisation; and Sub-section (3) enjoined the University "to promote studies to provide for research in Punjabi language and literature and to undertake measures for the development of Punjabi language, literature and culture". By Clause 2(1)(a) of the Statutes framed under the Act, the colleges were required to have a regularly constituted governing body consisting of not more than 20 persons approved by the Senate including, among others, two representatives of the University and the principal of the College. Under Clause (1)(3) if these requirements were not complied with the affiliation was liable to be withdrawn. By Clause 18 the staff initially appointed were to be approved by the Vice Chancellor and subsequent changes had to be reported to the University for the Vice- Chancellor's approval. And by Clause 18 non- government colleges were to comply with the requirements laid down in the ordinance governing service and conduct of teachers. It was held that Clause 2(1)(a) interfered with the right of the religious minority to administer their educational institutions, but that Clause 18 did not suffer from the same vice. It was held that ordinances prescribing regulations governing the conditions of service and conduct of teachers must be considered to be one enacted in the larger interest of the institution to ensure their efficiency and excellence. It was similarly held that Sub- sections (2) and (3) of Section 4 do not offend any of the rights under Articles 29(1) and 30(1). It must be observed that, whilst dealing with the Articles 29 and 30, this Court observed as follows:
Supreme Court of India Cites 123 - Cited by 914 - Full Document

Vishnu Vardhan @ Vishnu Pradhan vs The State Of Uttar Pradesh on 23 July, 2025

[The Constitution Bench in D.A.V. College [D.A.V. College v. State of Punjab, (1971) 2 SCC 269], further held that while the first proposition is valid, the second is not. Thus, the entertainment of the writ petition does not mean that this Court has to examine the impugned legislation or legislative competence if the same is not found to be infringing fundamental rights.
Supreme Court of India Cites 77 - Cited by 0 - D Datta - Full Document

Hemant Kanoria vs Uco Bank & Ors on 25 August, 2025

[The Constitution Bench in D.A.V. College [D.A.V. College v. State of Punjab, (1971) 2 SCC 269], further held that while the first proposition is valid, the second is not. Thus, the entertainment of the writ petition does not mean that this Court has to examine the impugned legislation or legislative competence if the same is not found to be infringing fundamental rights.
Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side) Cites 37 - Cited by 0 - T Ghosh - Full Document

Smti Sujata Gupta vs The State Of Meghalaya And Ors on 24 June, 2014

The Apex Court in Kerela Bill, 1957 case (Supra) further held that by admitting non-members into the minority institution does not shed its character and cease to be a minority institution. The Apex Court in D.A.V. College Bhatinda's case (Supra) held that the right of the minority to establish and administer educational institutions of their choice would include the right to have a choice of medium instruction also which would be the result of reading Article30(1) with Article 29(1). The Apex Court in State of Kerela, etc. v. Very Rev. Mother Provincial, etc.: 1970(2) SCC 417 held that:-
Meghalaya High Court Cites 32 - Cited by 0 - T N Singh - Full Document

Matrubhasha Abhiyan vs State Of Gujarat on 22 February, 2023

to-day affairs of the people living in the State of Maharashtra and also for proper carrying out of daily administration. Hence the regulation imposed by the State of Maharashtra upon the linguistic minorities to teach its regional language is only a reasonable one. This Court ruled that the right of minorities to establish and administer educational institutions of "their choice" under Article 30(1) read with Article 29(1) would include the right to have choice of Page 8 of 27 Downloaded on : Sat Feb 25 20:37:32 IST 2023 C/WPPIL/76/2022 ORDER DATED: 22/02/2023 medium of instruction. (See generally the Constitution Bench decisions in D.A.V. College v. State of Punjab [(1971) 2 SCC 261] and D.A.V. College v. State of Punjab [(1971) 2 SCC 269] .) But this exercise of "choice" of instructive language in schools by the linguistic minorities is subject to the reasonable regulation imposed by the State concerned. A particular State can validly take a policy decision to compulsorily teach its regional language.
Gujarat High Court Cites 20 - Cited by 0 - S G Gokani - Full Document

K.R.Ramaswamy @ Traffic Ramaswamy vs State on 23 August, 2007

A proper understanding of Marathi language is necessary for easily carrying out the day- to-day affairs of the people living in the State of Maharashtra and also for proper carrying out of daily administration. Hence the regulation imposed by the State of Maharashtra upon the linguistic minorities to teach its regional language is only a reasonable one. This Court ruled that the right of minorities to establish and administer educational institutions of "their choice" under Article 30(1) read with Article 29(1) would include the right to have choice of medium of instruction. (See generally the Constitution Bench decisions in D.A.V. College v. State of Punjab and D.A.V. College v. State of Punjab.) But this exercise of "choice"
Madras High Court Cites 27 - Cited by 4 - D Murugesan - Full Document

T.M.A. Pai Foundation & Ors vs State Of Karnataka & Ors on 31 October, 2002

In the second case of D.A.V. College v. State of Punjab reported in (1971) Supp. SCR 688 the Dayanand Anglo Vedic College Trust was formed to perpetuate the memory of the founder of the Arya Samaj. It ran various institutions in the country. The colleges managed and administered by the Trust were, before the Punjab Reorganisation Act, affiliated to the Punjab University. After the reorganisation of the State of Punjab in 1969, the Punjab Legislative passed the Guru Nanak University (Amritsar) Act (21 of 1969). Colleges in the districts specified ceased to be affiliated to the Punjab University and were to be associated with and admitted to the privileges of the new university. Sub-section (2) of Section 4 of the Act provided that the University "shall make provision for study and research on the life and teachings of Guru Nanak and their cultural and religious impact in the context of Indian and World Civilisation; and sub-section (3) enjoined the University "to promote studies to provide for research in Punjabi language and literature and to undertake measures for the development of Punjabi language, literature and culture". By clause 2(1)(a) of the Statutes framed under the Act, the colleges were required to have a regularly constituted governing body consisting of not more than 20 persons approved by the Senate including, among others, two representatives of the University and the principal of the College. Under Clause (1)(3) if these requirements were not complied with the affiliation was liable to be withdrawn. By clause 18 the staff initially appointed were to be approved by the Vice Chancellor and subsequent changes had to be reported to the University for the Vice- Chancellor's approval. And by Clause 18 non-government colleges were to comply with the requirements laid down in the ordinance governing service and conduct of teachers. It was held that Clause 2(1)(a) interfered with the right of the religious minority to administer their educational institutions, but that Clause 18 did not suffer from the same vice. It was held that ordinances prescribing regulations governing the conditions of service and conduct of teachers must be considered to be one enacted in the larger interest of the institution to ensure their efficiency and excellence. It was similarly held that sub- sections (2) and (3) of Section 4 do not offend any of the rights under Articles 29(1) and 30(1). It must be observed that, whilst dealing with the Articles 29 and 30, this Court observed as follows:
Supreme Court of India Cites 55 - Cited by 0 - S N Variava - Full Document

Arya Samaj Education Trust, Delhi And ... vs The Director Of Education, Delhi ... on 17 November, 1975

(4) The argument of Shri Setalvad that there was nothing to indicate that Arya Samajis should be Hindus was rejected on the ground that it overlooked the basic tenets of the sect in that it admits to membership only those Hindus who subscribe to the decalogue and its beliefs in the canone of vedic interpretation laid down by Swami Dayanand. But non-Hindus had to undergo Shudhi ceremony.
Delhi High Court Cites 28 - Cited by 5 - Full Document

R.K. Seth vs Cbci Society For Medical Education And ... on 20 September, 1984

16. The stand taken as above would have been unexceptionable if the state prescribing the age of superannuation was inconsistent with Art. 30 and, therefore unenforceable against the college. But the validity of the statutes is beyond question in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case D. A. V. College v. State of Punjab (supra). Therefore, the University has the power to make and enforce rule of superannuation for teachers of the college. Annexure-F was issued by the University for the enforcement of Ordinance 56 framed under the Bangalore University Act, 1964, which was in force then which fixed the age of superannuation of teachers in affiliated colleges at 60 years and which was continuing in force by virtue of S. 72 of the 1976 Act. The said Ordinance has since been replaced by statute 20 framed by the University in exercise of its powers under S. 35 read with S. 67(3) of the Act. Enforceability of this statute against minority institution is upheld in the order made in W.P. No. 19067 of 1981. From this is follows, old Ordinance 56 was also valid and enforceable against the college. Once it is held that the Ordinance 56 was valid, the University in view of S. 67(3) of the Act, had the power to issue the direction which it gave in its letter (Annexure-F). In that letter, there was a clear direction by the University to the college that all teachers appointed on full time basis should be treated as on permanent employment. Even in terms of the contract of appointment of the petitioners, the compulsory regulation of the University in the order. This condition gives the clearest indication that persons like the petitioners who had been appointed as regular members of the teaching staff against permanent posts of lecturers or Readers or Professors, as the case may be, were to be governed by the age of superannuation prescribed in the Statute and not by the period specified in the contract as the latter must yield to the former which is a compulsory regulation framed by the University and enforceable against the College.
Karnataka High Court Cites 29 - Cited by 1 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 Next