IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL WPMS No. 529 of 2008 Dr. Uma Shankar Thapliyal ……..Petitioner. Versus The Chancellor, H.N.B. Garhwal University, Dehradun and others. ………Respondents. Mr. Rakesh Thapliyal, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. J.P. Joshi, Advocate for respondent no. 2 and 3. 24th March, 2009 Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. Petitioner, by means of this writ petition, has challenged the list of registered graduates maintained by the H.N.B. Garhwal University (hereinafter referred to as “the University”) and sought a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus of this Court directing the University to prepare the list of registered graduates in accordance with the procedure laid down and particularly in accordance with the first statute of University framed under Section 50 (1) of the U.P. State Universities Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). 2. The gravamen of the argument raised by the petitioner was that the procedure for preparation of the list of registered graduates has been laid down in the first statute particularly in accordance with the procedure laid down in the Clause 4.04 /4.11 of Chapter IV of the first statute of the University. The petitioner has annexed the list of registered graduates, which is published by the University from time to time and alleged that many of the registered graduates, who are named in the list have a common address. The address of many registered 2 graduates is by the name of Sanjay Talkies of Srinagar, Garhwal and some registered graduates have a common address as Hotel Ambey, Devi Road, Kotdwar, Garhwal. The petitioner alleges that so many people have a common address and this shows that the procedure is not correct and what is being done, in fact is that on account of this, the election process is also affected. 3. Admittedly, the registered graduates of the University elect the University Court, which in turn, elects the members of the Executive Council, therefore, a bonafide list of registered graduates is an essential requirement. In this case, vide order dated 2.3.2009, the records were summoned from the University pertaining to the list of registered graduates. Today, records have been submitted to this Court by Mr. J.P. Joshi, Advocate for the University. The records were also shown to the counsel for the petitioner. 4. In the opinion of the Court, prima facie, there is no anomaly in the preparation of the list of registered graduates inasmuch as the name of the registered graduates, year of passing from the University as well as the address is given. 5. Now, it is true that many of the registered graduates do have a common address. However, the counsel for the petitioner has not been able to show as to which provision of law is violated, in case a common address is given by many registered graduates. Evidently, it is for the communication to these registered graduates, who after passing out from the University settle down in various parts of the country and sometimes they are 3 frequently transferred, if they are in service. Therefore if many of these graduates give a common address of the town in which the University is situated, in the opinion of this Court, there is no anomaly in it. However, for abundant precaution, the University is directed that it must take precaution while such registered graduates exercise their right of voting for electing University Court or members of Executive Council and their identification must be made properly. 6. The learned counsel for the University, Mr. J.P. Joshi has also made a submission before this Court that the University is no more a State University and has become a Central University and therefore, it is outside the purview of the U.P. State Universities Act. Be that as it may, this Court is not giving any finding as the consequence of such change in status of the University. 7. With the aforesaid observations, writ petition is disposed of. (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.) 24.3.2009 Rathour