https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165213 Mandamus under Article 226 lies only where the applicant establishes a specific legal right correlated to a legal duty enforceable against the respondent. The Court held that, even assuming the College Governing Body performed a public duty in making appointments, the appellant could not obtain writ relief because no provision in the University Statutes conferred a right to appointment or reinstatement as Principal. As no enforceable legal right was shown, the broader questions whether the Statutes had the force of law or whether mandamus could otherwise lie against the Governing Body did not require decision. The challenge to the appointment therefore failed. en-us Fri, 15 Dec 1961 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 28 Aug 2014 20:36:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165213 Mandamus under Article 226 lies only where the applicant establishes a specific legal right correlated to a legal duty enforceable against the respondent. The Court held that, even assuming the College Governing Body performed a public duty in making appointments, the appellant could not obtain writ relief because no provision in the University Statutes conferred a right to appointment or reinstatement as Principal. As no enforceable legal right was shown, the broader questions whether the Statutes had the force of law or whether mandamus could otherwise lie against the Governing Body did not require decision. The challenge to the appointment therefore failed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 15 Dec 1961 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=165213