“The world acknowledges that children in conflict with law should be treated differently than adults in conflict with law. The reason is that the mind of the child has not attained maturity and it is still developing. Therefore, the child should be tested on different parameters and should be given an opportunity of being brought into the mainstream if, during his juvenility, has acted in conflict with law.”1
Justice Vikram Nath
Career Trajectory- From Advocate to Judge of the Supreme Court
Born on 24-09-1962, Justice Vikram Nath hails from a family of lawyers with him being the 4th generation in his family to pursue law.2 He graduated in Science in the 19833 and later obtained his law degree from the University of Lucknow in 1986.4 He enrolled as an advocate on 30-03-1987 and practised as an advocate in the Allahabad High Court.5
Did You Know? Justice Vikram Nath was recommended for first Chief Justice of new Andhra Pradesh High Court,8 following the bifurcation of a combined High Court for Andhra Pradesh and Telangana. Justice Nath was recommended as Chief Justice of the Gujarat High Court on 22-08-2019 by the Supreme Court Collegium comprising of Ranjan Gogoi, CJI, S.A. Bobde and N.V. Ramana, JJ9 and after the recommendation was approved by the Ministry of Law and Justice, he took charge as 26th Chief Justice of Gujarat High Court on 10-09-201910.
Did You Know? Justice Nath was the first Chief Justice of a High Court in India to live stream Court proceedings on YouTube during the 2020 Covid Pandemic.11
Justice Nath was elevated to the Supreme Court on 31-08-2021 and is due to retire on 23-09-2027.12
Did You Know? Justice Vikram Nath is likely to serve as Chief Justice of India for seven months from 10-02-2027 to 24-09-2027.13
Section 6A of DSPE Act unconstitutional from date of insertion: Supreme Court Constitution Bench
While considering whether declaration made in Subramanian Swamy v. CBI, (2014) 8 SCC 682, regarding unconstitutionality of Section 6-A of Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 (‘DSPE Act’) could be applied retrospectively in context of Article 20 of Constitution of India, the Constitution Bench of Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Sanjiv Khanna, Abhay S. Oka, Vikram Nath* and J.K. Maheshwari, JJ. held that its decision in Subramanian Swamy (supra) declaring Section 6-A of DSPE Act unconstitutional, shall have retrospective effect, to be ineffective from the date of its insertion.
[CBI v. R.R. Kishore, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 1146]
[Andaman & Nicobar Islands Gang rape case] Supreme Court modifies bail conditions for Ex-Chief Secretary and 2 others
In a batch of petitions challenging order passed by Calcutta High Court on 20-02-2023 granting bail to Jitendra Narain, Ex-Chief Secretary of Andaman and Nicobar Islands for offences under Sections 376-D, 228-A, 506 and 120 of Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’) and bail granted to two co-accused from the same First Information Report (‘FIR’), the Division Bench of Vikram Nath* and Ahsanuddin Amanullah, JJ refused to interfere with the impugned order and modified the conditions for grant of bail.
[XXX v. State (UT of Andaman & Nicobar Islands, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 1062]
Supreme Court analyses application of Non Est Factum and Misrepresentation
In an appeal assailing correctness of the judgment and order passed by Madras High Court on 21-11-2008 allowing second appeal in N. Krishnasamy Mudaliar v. Ramathal, 2008 SCC OnLine Mad 864, the Division Bench of Vikram Nath* and Ahsanuddin Amanullah, JJ. explained in detail the rule related to non est factum and misrepresentation in a document.
The Court explained the settled law that “where it is alleged that the document of sale is void, then no cancellation would be necessary and such a document can be ignored under law. Cancellation of a sale deed would be necessary only where it is alleged to be voidable on facts.” The Court explained that the fraudulant misrepresentation in the instant case was not limited to the contents but character of the document. It further pinpointed that through the instant, it was clear that plea of non est factum was well pleaded in clear and strict terms, which the High Court went wrong in recording.
[Ramathal v. K. Rajamani, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 1022]
How Ex-RJD MP Prabhunath Singh was Convicted in 1995 Double Murder Case?
“The three main stake holders in a criminal trial, namely the Investigating Officer that is the part of the police of the State of Bihar, the Public Prosecutor, and the Judiciary, have all utterly failed to keep up their respective duties and responsibilities cast upon them.”, this is what the 3-judge bench of Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Abhay S. Oka and Vikram Nath,* JJ had to say while reversing the acquittal of ex-RJD MP Prabhunath Singh in a double murder case. The Court went on to convict Prabhunath Singh under Sections 302 and 307 of the IPC for committing culpable homicide amounting to murder and attempt to murder and directed him to be taken into custody and be produced before the Court on 01.09.2023 to decide the quantum of sentence.
[Harendra Rai v. State of Bihar, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 1122]
“Prosecution had failed to establish charge”; SC acquits murder convict after 15 years in prison
In an appeal against the judgment and order of Chhattisgarh High Court, whereby the conviction under Section 302 of the Penal Code, 1860 and the sentence to undergo life imprisonment along with fine of Rs.5,000/- passed by the Additional Sessions Judge has been affirmed. the division bench of Vikram Nath* and Ahsanuddin Amanullah, JJ. while acquitting the convict, said that it is possible that the deceased was heavily drunk and had fallen on a sharp-edged object because of which he had received the injury. Thus, the prosecution had failed to establish the charge.
The Court opined that once there is no eyewitness of the incident, the prosecution will have to establish a motive for the commission of the crime because in a case of direct evidence, motive may not have a major role. If there is no motive proved and there are direct eyewitnesses, motive may lose its importance, but in the present case due to absence of eyewitness, motive has an important role to play.
[Shatrughan v. State of Chhattisgarh, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 858]
“Theft on train not deficiency in service by Railways”; Supreme Court sets aside concurrent orders by NCDRC, SCDRC and District Consumer Forum
In a civil appeal against dismissal of a challenge by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (‘NCDRC’) against order holding Indian Railways liable to pay Rs 1 lakh to the passenger whose cash was stolen while travelling by train, the Division Bench of Vikram Nath and Ahsanuddin Amanullah, JJ. allowed the appeal and set aside the orders passed by the NCDRC, SCDRC and District Consumer Forum in the instant matter.
The Court, while hearing the instant matter, expressed that “We fail to understand as to how the theft could be said to be in any way a deficiency in service by the Railways.” The Court was of the view that the Railways could not be held responsible if a passenger was not able to protect his belongings.
[Station Superintendent v. Surender Bhola, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 741]
[Beant Singh Assassination Case] Supreme Court refuses to commute death penalty of Balwant Singh
In a Writ Petition seeking directions for commutation of death sentence of the petitioner in 1995 Bomb Blast that led to the assassination of the then Punjab Chief Minister Beant Singh, killed 16 others, and left several persons injured, the Bench of B.R. Gavai, Vikram Nath* and Sanjay Karol, JJ. rejected the claim of inordinate delay in disposal of mercy petition for the fact that the same was not submitted by the petitioner himself. The Court pointed towards the pending matters and left it to the Executive to decide on such sensitive matters.
[Balwant Singh v. Union of India, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 555]
‘Possible that the entire story was a complete set-up by police’; Supreme Court set aside conviction in rioting, criminal trespass and murder case
By way of a criminal appeal, the appellant challenged the order passed by the Gauhati High Court wherein the appeal was dismissed confirming the judgment passed by the Trial Court convicting the 11 out of 13 accused under Section 147, 148, 447, 323, 302 and 149 of the Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’) sentencing them to rigorous imprisonment for 6 months and a fine of INR 1000/- on default of which the petitioner would have to further undergo one month rigorous imprisonment. While exercising its criminal appellate jurisdiction, the full bench of B.R. Gavai, Vikram Nath* and Sanjay Karol, J.J., set aside the conviction and sentence of the appellants. Although the death of the deceased was homicidal, but the prosecution was unable to establish the case beyond reasonable doubt against the accused appellants making them entitled to the benefit of doubt.
[Pulen Phukan v. State of Assam, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 350]
‘No inconsistency between Regulation 30-A of IBBI Regulations and Section 12-A of IBC’; Supreme Court sets aside NCLT order
In a Civil Appeal filed by the suspended Director of the Corporate Debtor Manpasand Beverages Ltd. challenging the correctness of order dated 13-04-2021 passed by National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Ahmedabad Bench rejecting application under Section 12-A of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 for withdrawal of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process, the Division Bench of B.R. Gavai and Vikram Nath*, JJ. set aside the impugned NCLT order, allowed the application under Regulation 30-A of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons) Regulations, 2018 and said that NCLT fell in error while taking a contrary view.
[Abhishek Singh v. Huhtamaki PPL Ltd., 2023 SCC OnLine SC 349]
‘Additional Special Road Tax not manifestly unjust’; Supreme Court upholds validity of Section 3A (3) of Himachal Pradesh Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1972
In an appeal against Himachal Pradesh High Court declaring Section 3A (3) of Himachal Pradesh Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1972 as ultra vires the State powers while quashing two other notifications in this regard, the bench of Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Abhay S. Oka and Vikram Nath*, JJ. upheld the validity of the said provisions and set aside the High Court’s judgment.
The Court set aside the High Court’s order and held that the validity of Section 3-A(3) of the Act has been wrongly decided as ultra vires by the High Court. The Court clarified that the tax imposed is regulatory in nature and not a penalty. Regarding the notifications quashed by the High Court against lumpsum taxes, the Court relied upon State of T.N. v. M. Krishnappan, (2005) 4 SCC 53, wherein, levy of lumpsum taxes has been upheld by the 3-judge bench.
[State of H.P. v. Goel Bus Service, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 46]
Manipulated laboratory report, broken links of evidence; Supreme Court reverses concurrent findings of Courts below to acquit a murder accused
The Division Bench of Hemant Gupta and Vikram Nath*, JJ., reversed the impugned judgments of the Punjab and Haryana High Court and the Trial Court of convicting the appellant for murder on the basis of circumstantial evidence.
Noting that there were many broken links in the chain of evidence and the prosecution could not prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt. Casting a doubt on the prosecution version, the Court remarked,
“The milk which is said to be adulterated with the poison was taken out from the refrigerator, transferred into a pan for boiling, and thereafter given to the deceased. If it actually had organophosphorus in it the smell would have filled up the room. The deceased being a healthy woman aged 45 years would not have consumed it if the pungent smell was coming from the milk. Even the informant did not sense any foul smell from the milk while boiling it.”
[Rajbir Singh v. State of Punjab, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1090]
Mental capacity & ability to understand consequences of acts not same; Guidelines must be in place for preliminary assessment of children above 16 years of age for trial as adults
In an unfortunate incident in 2017, a class II student was found with his throat slit in the bathroom of his school. A class XI student, aged 16 years and 5 months on the date of the incident, was arrested. The Supreme Court was called upon to examine the preliminary assessment made under Section 15 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. The bench of Dinesh Maheshwari and Vikram Nath*, JJ has asked the Central Government and the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights and the State Commission for Protection of Child Rights to consider issuing guidelines or directions in this regard which may assist and facilitate the Board in making the preliminary assessment under section 15 of the Act, 2015.
“A child with average intelligence/IQ will have the intellectual knowledge of the consequences of his actions. But whether or not he is able to control himself or his actions will depend on his level of emotional competence. For example, risky driving may result in an accident. But if emotional competence is not high, the urge for thrill seeking may get the better of his intellectual understanding.”
[Barun Chandra Thakur v. Bholu, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 870]
Unless there’s a written instrument declaring land was voluntarily relinquished for no consideration, State cannot deny payment of compensation
The Division Court of Vikram Nath* and Dinesh Maheshwari, JJ., held that the State’s act of taking the appellants’ property, all being farmers, without compensation, was arbitrary, irrational, and a clear violation of Article 300-A of the Constitution. Since the land in question was agricultural, the Court opined that non-payment of adequate compensation would amount to a violation of the right to livelihood; a fundamental right under Article 21.
[Kalyani v. Sulthan Bathery Municipality, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 516]
In case relating to court fees, the bench of Dinesh Maheshwari and Vikram Nath*, JJ had the occasion to explains why the legislature had left it open for the plaintiff to value his claim for the six categories of the suit falling under Section 7(iv) of the Court Fees Act, 1870.
[State of Punjab v. Dev Brat Sharma, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 330]
Right to promotion is not considered to be a fundamental right but consideration for promotion has now been evolved as a fundamental right
The 3-Judges Bench comprising of Dr D.Y. Chandrachud, Vikram Nath* and B.V. Nagarathna, JJ., set aside the seniority list prepared by the Department of Minor Irrigation, U.P. on finding the list to be in contravention of statutory mandate. The Bench stated,
“The Appointing Authority ought to have prepared a combined merit list based upon the performance or the proficiency on the basis of the marks received in the selection test as prepared by the Commission; otherwise, it would amount to denial of the right of consideration for promotion to a more meritorious candidate as against a candidate having lesser merit.”
[Ajay Kumar Shukla v. Arvind Rai, (2022) 12 SCC 579]
Same offence but separate trials — Can appellate court pass common judgment based on evidence recorded in only one trial?
In the case where two different criminal appeals were being heard against two sets of accused, on account of one of them absconding, and decided against two different judgments based upon evidence recorded in separate trials, though for the commission of the same offence, the 3-judge bench of Dr. DY Chandrachud, Vikram Nath* and BV Nagarathna, has held that the Madras High Court fell into an error while passing a common judgement, based on evidence recorded in only one trial, against two sets of accused persons having been subjected to separate trials.
Bilkis Bano’s rapists walk free: Supreme Court issues notice to Gujarat Government
When on August 15, 2022, her rapists walked out of the prison after serving 15 years’ imprisonment based on Gujarat Government’s remission policy, Bilkis Bano found herself “bereft of words” and “numb”.
The 3-judge bench of NV Ramana, CJ and Ajay Rastogi and Vikram Nath, JJ has issued notice to the Gujarat Government on the release of 11 men convicted for the gangrape of Bilkis Bano during the 2002 Gujarat riots. The Court has also directed that the 11 released men be impleaded as parties in the plea challenging the decision of the Gujarat Government.
[Subhashini Ali v. State of Gujarat, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1083]
What happens when a candidate, in a competitive exam, uses different language in answer sheet than that filled in application form?
In the case where a candidate appearing for examination for recruitment to the post of Constables in Railway Protection Force (RPF) had used a different language in the OMR answer book than that filled in the application form, the bench of Hemant Gupta* and Vikram Nath, JJ has held that his candidature was rightly rejected.
[Union of India v. Mahendra Singh, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 909]
Bail applications of co-accused arising from the self-same FIR shall be listed before the same court to avoid disparity
With a view to bringing reform in practices relating to disposal of bail applications arising from the same case, the Division Bench of Ajay Rastogi and Vikram Nath, JJ., held that where more than one bail application has been filed by co-accused of offences arising from self-same FIR, all such applications shall be listed before the same court to avoid disparity.
[Abhyanand Sharma v. State of Bihar, (2022) 10 SCC 819]
FIR for repeated rape cannot be filed just because a long standing relationship is no longer working out; Pre-arrest bail granted
The Division Bench of Hemant Gupta and Vikram Nath, JJ has granted pre-arrest bail to a man in a case relating to the rape of the woman he had been in a relationship with for four years.
When the relationship between the bail applicant and the complainant started, the complainant was 21 years of age. Taking these factors together, the Court observed,
“…the complainant has willingly been staying with the appellant and had the relationship. Therefore, now if the relationship is not working out, the same cannot be a ground for lodging an FIR for the offence under Section 376(2)(n) IPC.”
[Ansaar Mohammad v. State of Rajasthan, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 886]
Whether the term “school children” includes university students while interpreting Government Memo exempting buses carrying school children from Passengers Tax?
While holding that the term “school children” will include college and university as well while interpreting government memo exempting passengers tax in respect of Stage Carriage (buses) owned by educational institution and used for the transportation of children to and from such institutions, the Division Bench of Dinesh Maheshwari and Vikram Nath, JJ., remarked,
“It gets perforce reiterated that the broad expression “children”, obviously, refers to the students taking instructions in educational institutions, irrespective of their class or standard or level.”
[State of Haryana v. Daronacharya College of Engineering, (2022) 9 SCC 301]
[Midnight Hearing] | Situation of Ahmedabad on account of COVID-19 cannot be compared with situation in Puri or in the State of Orissa (sic Odisha); No Rath Yatra at Ahmedabad
A Division Bench of Vikram Nath, CJ* and J.B. Pardiwala, J., rejected all the civil applications in a midnight hearing, filed with regard to granting permission for Rath Yatra on the ground that Supreme Court allowed the Yatra in restricted manner by modifying its earlier order.
[Mahant Akhileshwardasji Ramlakhandasji v. State of Gujarat, 2020 SCC OnLine Guj 917 ]
“If State would not have been doing anything, we all would have been dead”: Gujarat High Court berates politicizing of COVID-19 situation while at the same time reminding the State of its Constitutional obligations
A Division Bench of Vikram Nath, CJ and J.B. Pardiwala, J.* while addressing certain issues with regard to COVID-19, stated that,
“Healthcare access is the ability to obtain healthcare services such as prevention, diagnosis, treatment and management of diseases, illness, disorders, and other health impacting conditions. For healthcare to be accessible it must be affordable and convenient.”
[Suo Motu v. State of Gujarat, 2020 SCC OnLine Guj 836]
[COVID-19] | No Rath Yatra shall be carried out at Ahmedabad; No activities secular or religious associated with Rath Yatra to be conducted
A Division Bench of Vikram Nath, CJ* and J.B. Pardiwala, J., held that in view of present times of outbreak of COVID-19, there shall be no Rath Yatra at Ahmedabad and any of the districts in the State of Gujarat.
[Hitesh Kumar Vittalbhai Chavda v. Shri Jagannathji Mandir Trust, 2020 SCC OnLine Guj 910]
Compassionate Appointment | “The concept that such daughter-in-law must go back and stay with her parents is abhorrent to our civilized society”: Allahabad HC
The 3- Judge Bench comprising of Ferdino Inacio Rebello, C.J. and Vineet Saran and Vikram Nath, JJ., deliberated upon the question that whether the definition of “family” under the U.P. State Electricity Board Dying in Harness Rules, 1975 would include a daughter-in-law. It was observed that a daughter-in-law on the death of her husband, does not cease to be a part of the family.
“The concept that such daughter-in-law must go back and stay with her parents is abhorrent to our civilized society. Such daughter-in-law must, therefore, have also right to be considered for compassionate appointment as she is part of the family where she is? Married and if staying with her husband’s family. In this context, in our opinion, arbitrariness, as presently existing, can be avoided by including the daughter-in-law in the definition of ‘family’. Otherwise, the definition to that extent, prima facie, would be irrational and arbitrary. The State, therefore, to consider this aspect and take appropriate steps so that a widowed daughter-in-law like a widowed daughter, is also entitled for consideration by way of compassionate appointment, if other criteria is satisfied”.
[U.P. Power Corpn. Ltd. v. Urmila Devi, 2011 SCC OnLine All 152]
‘Harrowing Tales, Unfortunate and Unimaginable Difficulties’ HC takes suo moto cognizance due to upsurge in COVID-19 cases and asks what steps Government will take
The Division Bench of Vikram Nath, CJ and Bhargav D. Karia, J., had a dialogue with the Senior most State Law Officers, Advocate General and Government Pleader expressing concern regarding the upsurge of COVID-19 cases in the State and requesting the State to take appropriate measures in order to check and control the rise in COVID-19 cases and its management.
[Suo Motu v. State of Gujarat, 2021 SCC OnLine Guj 2964]
Respondent entitled to gratuity under S. 2© of Payment of Gratuity (Amendment) Act, 2009; Court dismisses appeal while reproducing observations of Single Judge
The Division Bench of Vikram Nath, CJ and Ashutosh J. Shastri, J., dismissed a Letters Patent Appeal which was filed aggrieved by the judgment and order passed in Special Civil Application.
The Court stated that order cannot be said to be perverse in any form, as all possible contentions which had been raised have been dealt with by the Single Judge. The Court further mentioned that after construing the relevant provisions, namely Sectio©(e) of the Payment of Gratuity (Amendment) Act, 2009 and after analyzing the facts in the context of Sect© 40(c) of the Act, they were in conformity with the view taken by the Single Judge.
[Godhara Sarvajanik Shikshan Mandal v. Dimpleben Bhrupeshkumar Shah, 2020 SCC OnLine Guj 1656]
Employed woman permitted to appear for All India Bar Examination; Directions issued to the Bar Council of Gujarat
A Division Bench of Vikram Nath, CJ and J.B. Padiwala, J., allowed a petition which was filed praying to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction in order to quash and set aside Rule 1 and Rule 2 of the Bar Council of Gujarat (Enrollment) Rules to the extent that they prohibited the admission of a person who was otherwise qualified to be admitted as an advocate, but was either in full or part-time service or employment or was engaged in any trade, business or profession, as an advocate.
[Twinkle Rahul Mangaonkar v. Union of India, 2020 SCC OnLine Guj 3541]
Virtual Streaming of Court proceedings to be decided after Judge’s report to work out modalities in view of facilitating public at large
A Division Bench of Vikram Nath, CJ and P.B. Pardiwala*, J., while addressing an issue with regard to the live streaming of the Court proceedings held that a committee to work out the modalities for the said purpose has been constituted comprising of two Judges of this Court.
[Pruthvirajsinh Zala v. Gujarat High Court, 2020 SCC OnLine Guj 1055]
Tablighi Jamaat Crisis | Union of India to provide complete information to State of Gujarat of persons who were present for Tablighi Jamaat & have entered Gujarat
A Division Bench of Vikram Nath*, CJ and Ashutosh J. Shastri, J. addressed a suo motu public interest litigation in view of incident of mass congregation in Delhi.
At least 200 members of the said congregation have been repravelled traveled to the State of Gujarat who may be infected with COVID-19. News reports have further confirmed death of one person in Gujarat out of a total of 8 deaths all over the country who had participated in the congregation at Delhi.
[Suo Motu v. State of Gujarat, 2020 SCC OnLine Guj 385]
Re-evaluation of answer sheets with the correct answer key was necessary to maintain the purity of the examination: Allahabad HC
-While deciding petitions pertaining to the same examination conducted by the U.P. Higher Education Service Commission for the position of Lecturers in various subjects in degree/post-graduate colleges in the State of U.P., a Division bench comprising of Vikram Nath and Daya Shankar Tripathi, JJ., held that re-evaluation of answer sheets with the correct answer key was necessary to maintain the purity of the examination and directed the Commission to re-evaluate the answer sheets, declare the results accordingly, and conduct interviews for candidates affected by the re-evaluation.
The Court directed the State Government not to issue appointment letters until the re-evaluation and selection process was completed, emphasizing the Commission’s responsibility in conducting the examination.
[Niraj Kumar Singh v. State of U.P.14]
Allahabad HC quashes provisions of UGC Guidelines forbidding the practice of creating department-wise cadres
While deciding a matter related to the recruitment of teachers in Banaras Hindu University (BHU), a central educational institution where the petitioners sought cancellation of the then recruitment drive in the University and demanded a fresh beginning, treating each department as a unit for calculating the number of faculty posts reserved for SCs, STs and OBCs, a Division bench comprising of Vikram Nath* and Daya Shankar Tripathi, JJ., quashed Clauses 6(c) and 8(a)(v) of the guidelines framed by the UGC in 2006, and the letter of the UGC dated 19-02-2008, which forbade the practice of creating department-wise cadres.
[Vivekanand Tiwari v. Union of India, ]
Note: The Supreme Court in Vijay Prakash Bharati v. Union of India, (2019) 12 SCC 410, affirmed the above-mentioned judgment.
“Basic feature of the Society along with its primary object had been altered by way of amendments to the Rules”: Allahabad HC observes
A Division bench comprising of D.S.R. Varma and Hon’ble Vikram Nath, JJ., observed that in the present case the basic feature of the Society along with its primary object had been altered by way of amendments to the Rules.
The Court accepted that the Assistant Registrar had the jurisdiction not only to deal with the validity of the convening of the meeting but also to examine the import of the resolution regarding the amendments of the Rules. The Court also agreed with the conclusion that the appellant 2 was not a member of the Society but was holding the office of the Secretary by virtue of being the Principal of the Boys’ High School, Allahabad.
The Court held that all other proceedings were also illegal, and the meetings were in violation of the statutory provisions. The Court held that the meetings itself had not been validly convened as per the Rules of the Society and concluded that the orders passed by the Assistant Registrar and the learned Single Judge do not warrant any interference.
[Allahabad High School Society v. State of U.P., ]
Note: The Supreme Court in Allahabad High School Society v. State of U.P., (2011) 6 SCC 118, affirmed the above-mentioned judgment.
*Judge who has penned the judgment.
2. Supreme Court gets 9 new judges: All you need to know, The Times of India.
14. Writ – A No. 12344 of 2017