Student not authorized to file a request on behalf of the institution: HC to CUK


Student not authorized to file a request on behalf of the institution: HC to CUK

Posted on 04 Dec. 2021 | Author Syed rukaya

Srinagar, December 03: The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh on Friday asked the Dean of the School of Legal Studies at the Central University of Kashmir (CUK) to explain how a student was allowed to file a petition on behalf of the institution.

The court, during the hearing of the case, noted that the dean or the ex officio president of the Institute or any leader of the University had not come forward to file this request.

The court said the student was only allowed to file and argue the petition on behalf of the Institute.

“But he is not allowed to file the petition on behalf of the Institute by himself,” the court said.

In this regard, a division bench composed of Chief Justice Pankaj Mithal and Judge Mohammad Akram Choudhary called on the Dean School of Legal Studies (ex officio chair), Center for Public Interest Litigation and Legal Aid, to come forward and clearly disclose the nature and status of said Institution.

The authorities were also asked to determine who has overall responsibility and under what provisions of the law it has been constituted.

The bench instructed the dean to inform him of the reasons why the director of the said institute himself does not appear to institute the request.

Previously, the Center for Public Interest Litigation and Legal Aid, a constituent institute of the Central University of Kashmir, preferred this public interest request through one of its students who asked the court to provide a free laptop or / and tablet or / and any other digital equipment, essential for the purposes of online courses and access to online education, for children belonging to “weakest groups” and “disadvantaged groups” .

He also called on the government to develop a policy / program to provide them with all consequential costs incurred for using these devices for the purpose of online coursework and access to online education, including Internet charges.

The court closed the case on December 31, 2021.

Comments are closed.