Nikhil Yadav vs University Of Delhi & Ors
2016 Latest Caselaw 7343 Del

      $~1
*     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+     W.P.(C) 11232/2016 & CM 43964/2016
      NIKHIL YADAV                                    ..... Petitioner
                          Through : Mr. Amit Khemka, Advocate

                          versus

      UNIVERSITY OF DELHI & ORS                    ..... Respondents
                    Through : Ms. Simran Jeet, proxy counsel for
                    Mr. Mahinder J.S. Rupal, Advocate for R-1 to 4.

      CORAM:
      HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI
                   ORDER

% 08.12.2016

1. This order is in continuation of the order dated 28.11.2016, on which date, counsel for the respondents No.1 to 4 had sought time to obtain instructions from the University with regard to the fate of the appeal, if any, preferred by the petitioner against the decisions dated 16.9.2016 of the Grievance Redressal Cell of the Delhi University, declining to interfere in the results of the DUSU Election 2016-17.

2. Today, proxy counsel appearing for counsel for respondents No.1 to 4 hands over a copy of the letter dated 2.12.2016 addressed by the Joint Registrar (Academic) to the petitioner intimating him that the Appellate Committee constituted by the Vice Chancellor, Delhi University to examine the appeal of the petitioner, has unanimously concluded that it has no merit and as a result, the same stands dismissed. The said letter is taken on record, with a copy to the counsel for the petitioner.

3. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the minutes of the meeting of the Appellate Committee have not been enclosed with the communication dated 2.12.2016 and in the absence of any reasons, the petitioner will not be in a position to assail the said order. He submits that the respondent may be directed to furnish the minutes/report of the Appellate Committee to enable the petitioner to challenge the same in accordance with law.

4. Needful shall be done by the respondents within two weeks.

5. The petition is disposed of, along with the pending application, with liberty granted to the petitioner to assail the order passed by the Appellate Committee of the respondents, in accordance with law.

HIMA KOHLI, J DECEMBER 08, 2016 sk