Court case – whatever Pranjal Jauhar’s lawyer argued today – still inconclusive – next hearing on Oct 13th

Key inconculsive arguments of Pranjal Jauhar’s lawyer before the Court today:

  1. Writ is not maintainable as SAES is a private body. (He perhaps forgot that SAES is discharging a public function of imparting education through MIS and Mirambika.)
  2. Parents & children have no locus standi in the matter. (Who else but the victims – those aggrieved by SAES actions of 14/4 and 1/7 would have locus standi in the matter? Tara Taxi Standwallah or the Vegetable and Fruit Vendors outside Gate No. 8?
  3. SAES and the Mirambika Management have the unfettered right to shift the school within the same locality. (He forgot the School Management Committee approval is not in place for the shifts and that the right to shift the school within the same locality cannot extend to shifting the school from a legal & safe premises to an illegal & unsafe.)
  4. A Writ of Mandamus cannot be issued because the 1984 DDA lease specifies ‘college’ and not ‘school’. (He forgot that the Chief Legal Advisor of DDA has opined that Mirambika can continue from the leased land and DDA has issued a Show Cause Notice to SAES questioning the engineering college prosed on the same leased land.)

He will continue on October 13th and we’ll try to decipher him and update you. Meanwhile, plea read the middle section of the following attachment


to see what SAES wrote on the Mirambika Engineering College site – about “Mirambika” – a center of excellence per SAES Chairman Dr Bijani and failed experiment per PJ and Kamala Menon.


Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s