https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=304933 A writ under Article 226 was held maintainable against a minority aided college where breach of statutory duties was alleged, because the action was tested against public law obligations. The Court also treated the impugned order as non-penal under Section 63(6) of the Mahatma Gandhi University Act, so no statutory appeal lay to the University Tribunal. It further found that the Principal's appointment was a substantive direct recruitment, not a five-year deputation. On that basis, the college's termination and attempted reversion were contrary to the Act, Statutes, and service rules, and were quashed; compensatory monetary relief was granted instead of reinstatement. en-us Thu, 18 Dec 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 07 Nov 2022 09:27:41 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=304933 A writ under Article 226 was held maintainable against a minority aided college where breach of statutory duties was alleged, because the action was tested against public law obligations. The Court also treated the impugned order as non-penal under Section 63(6) of the Mahatma Gandhi University Act, so no statutory appeal lay to the University Tribunal. It further found that the Principal's appointment was a substantive direct recruitment, not a five-year deputation. On that basis, the college's termination and attempted reversion were contrary to the Act, Statutes, and service rules, and were quashed; compensatory monetary relief was granted instead of reinstatement. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 18 Dec 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=304933