{"id":190206,"date":"2001-08-07T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2001-08-06T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gorakhpur-university-ors-vs-dr-shitla-prasad-nagendra-ors-on-7-august-2001"},"modified":"2019-01-26T16:00:11","modified_gmt":"2019-01-26T10:30:11","slug":"gorakhpur-university-ors-vs-dr-shitla-prasad-nagendra-ors-on-7-august-2001","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gorakhpur-university-ors-vs-dr-shitla-prasad-nagendra-ors-on-7-august-2001","title":{"rendered":"Gorakhpur University &amp; Ors vs Dr. Shitla Prasad Nagendra &amp; Ors on 7 August, 2001"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Gorakhpur University &amp; Ors vs Dr. Shitla Prasad Nagendra &amp; Ors on 7 August, 2001<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: Raju<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: S. Rajendra Babu, Doraiswamy Raju<\/div>\n<pre>           CASE NO.:\nAppeal (civil) 1874  of  1999\n\n\n\nPETITIONER:\nGORAKHPUR UNIVERSITY &amp; ORS.\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nDR. SHITLA PRASAD NAGENDRA &amp; ORS.\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT:\t07\/08\/2001\n\nBENCH:\nS. Rajendra Babu &amp; Doraiswamy Raju\n\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p>Raju, J.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tThe first respondent in the above appeal was initially appointed<br \/>\nas a Teacher in the Sociology Department of the appellant-university<br \/>\non 23.3.63 (Sic 73) and subsequently promoted as a Professor.  The<br \/>\nappellant-university had provided him with university accommodation.<br \/>\nDuring the period between 20.5.86 and 19.5.89 the first respondent<br \/>\nwas appointed as Vice-Chancellor of the University of Lucknow but,<br \/>\nin spite of the same, he appears to have continued to hold the<br \/>\naccommodation without vacating the same.  It is obvious from the<br \/>\nfacts stated that after his tenure as Vice-Chancellor he rejoined the<br \/>\nappellant-university and continued to serve till 11.1.90, the date on<br \/>\nwhich he attained the age of superannuation and even thereafter was<br \/>\ncontinued on re-employment basis in terms of the First Statutes of the<br \/>\nUniversity till 30.6.90.  It is an undisputable fact that he will be entitled<br \/>\nto the payment of pension and settlement of his claim as such with<br \/>\neffect from 1.7.90.  Though, it is stated that the first respondent or for<br \/>\nthat matter any employee is entitled to retain the university<br \/>\naccommodation for 4 months after retirement, the fact remained that<br \/>\nhe held the accommodation till 25.3.96. The appellant also does not<br \/>\nseem to have taken steps to settle the claim relating to terminal<br \/>\nbenefits.\n<\/p>\n<p>Since the appellant-university did not settle the first<br \/>\nrespondents claim for terminal benefits including the fixation and<br \/>\ndisbursement of the pension, the first respondent filed C.M.W.P.<br \/>\nNo.30428\/97.  The Writ Petition was opposed by the appellant-<br \/>\nuniversity contending that the first respondent, having not vacated the<br \/>\nquarter held by him when he retired and within the permissible<br \/>\nextended period, was liable for payment of penal rent in respect of<br \/>\nsuch accommodation and that as a matter of fact the Finance<br \/>\nController, Office of Directorate of Higher Education, U.P., who<br \/>\nexamined his pension papers, ordered on the recommendation of the<br \/>\nuniversity-authorities the adjustment of Rs.3,20,638.04 from the<br \/>\namounts due towards the retiral benefits.  Further, a sum of<br \/>\nRs.64,441.54 was also ordered to be deducted from the Provident<br \/>\nFund amount due to first respondent.  On a consideration of the<br \/>\nrespective claims of parties, a Division Bench of the Allahabad High<br \/>\nCourt by its Order dated 17.8.98, applying the principles laid down in<br \/>\nSom Prakash vs Union of India (AIR 1981 S.C. page 212) and <a href=\"\/doc\/897766\/\">R.<br \/>\nKapur vs Director of Inspection (Painting and Publication)<br \/>\nIncome Tax &amp; Anr.<\/a> (1994) 6 SCC page 589) overruled the objections<br \/>\nof the University holding that the pension and other retiral benefits<br \/>\ncannot be withheld or adjusted or appropriated for the satisfaction of<br \/>\nany other dues outstanding against the retired employee.  The action<br \/>\nof the university authorities to the contrary was held to be illegal and<br \/>\nwhile allowing the claim of the first respondent, a direction came to be<br \/>\nissued to pay the entire pension and Provident Fund etc. due to first<br \/>\nrespondent, with penal interest @ 18% within two months from the<br \/>\ndate of the order.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tAggrieved, the university authorities have come up before this<br \/>\nCourt.\tThe learned senior counsel for the appellants contended that<br \/>\nwhen the respondents did not vacate the official quarters even after<br \/>\nretirement and rendered himself liable for penal rent for such<br \/>\nunauthorized occupation, there is every justification in law to adjust<br \/>\nthe amounts due therefor to the university before settling and<br \/>\ndisbursing the terminal benefits and no exception could be taken for<br \/>\nthe move made on behalf of the University.  It was contended further<br \/>\nthat unless certificate of no dues or `no liability could be issued the<br \/>\nquestion of finalising pension papers will not arise at any rate, as long<br \/>\nas the claims relating to payment of penal rent remained unsettled.<br \/>\nThe decision in <a href=\"\/doc\/1809756\/\">Daya Shankar Lal vs Vice Chancellor, University<br \/>\nof Allahabad<\/a> (1992 (1) UPLBEC 654) was relied upon to contend<br \/>\nthat the Division Bench in this case committed an error in taking a<br \/>\ncontra view.  Reliance has also been placed on the decisions<br \/>\nreported in <a href=\"\/doc\/1439137\/\">Wazir Chand vs Union of India &amp; Others (JT<\/a> 2000<br \/>\nSuppl. (1) SC 515) as against the decisions noticed by the Division<br \/>\nBench of the High Court while deciding the case on hand.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tPer contra, the learned senior counsel appearing for the<br \/>\ncontesting respondents, while justifying the relief granted to his client,<br \/>\nhighlighted certain facts which, according to the learned counsel,<br \/>\nwere peculiar to the case on hand and the stand taken for the<br \/>\nappellant-university both before the High Court and this Court is<br \/>\nunreasonable, unjust and only demonstrated an attitude of<br \/>\nvindictiveness.\t The relevant facts so pointed out from the materials<br \/>\non records before us are that, every month the normal rent that was<br \/>\npayable was being remitted continuously to the university and the<br \/>\nsame was being accepted without demur till 23.3.96 when the quarter<br \/>\nwas vacated, that in spite of a request and application made, as per<br \/>\npractice in vogue for the allotment of the quarter in the name of his<br \/>\nson who is also in the employment of the appellant-university as<br \/>\nLecturer no orders were passed thereon, that there are resolutions of<br \/>\nthe university to waive penal rent and grant of such benefit to persons<br \/>\neven as late as in 1996, showed that a different stand and treatment<br \/>\nto the respondent alone constituted hostile discrimination, that it was<br \/>\nunreasonable to charge also rates stipulated by the Government in<br \/>\nthe year 1998 in the case of the respondent who retired in 1990 and<br \/>\nvacated in 1996 and that the appellant not only did not choose to take<br \/>\nany action to get the respondent vacated in accordance with law but<br \/>\non the other hand acquiesced in the occupation by accepting<br \/>\nregularly the normal rent.  A grievance has also been made that no<br \/>\nnotice or opportunity was given before determining and fixing liability<br \/>\nfor the penal rent.  It was also contended that apart from these facts<br \/>\ndemonstrating lack of bona fides in the appellant, the withholding of<br \/>\ninformation about the dismissal of the appeal filed by it on 22.7.96 in<br \/>\nSLP (C) CC..329\/96, against the earlier decision of a Division Bench<br \/>\nreported in S.N. Mathur vs Gorakhpur University, Gorakhpur, &amp;<br \/>\nOthers [1996 (2) ESC 211 (All.)] taking the very same view as in the<br \/>\npresent case in respect of another employee of the appellant-<br \/>\nuniversity, indicated the unethical approach of the University and<br \/>\ntherefore, this appeal is liable to be dismissed as of no merit.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tWe have carefully considered the submissions on behalf of the<br \/>\nrespective parties before us.  The earlier decision pertaining to this<br \/>\nvery university reported in 1996 (2) ESC 211 (All.) (supra) is that of a<br \/>\nDivision Bench rendered after considering the principles laid down<br \/>\nand also placing reliance upon the decisions of this Court reported in<br \/>\n1994 (6) SCC 589 (supra) which, in turn, relied upon earlier decisions<br \/>\nin <a href=\"\/doc\/1920837\/\">State of Kerala vs M. Padmanabhan Nair<\/a> [1985 (1) SCC 429]<br \/>\nand AIR 1981 SC page 212 (Supra).  This court has been repeatedly<br \/>\nemphasizing the position that pension and gratuity are no longer<br \/>\nmatters of any bounty to be distributed by Government but are<br \/>\nvaluable rights acquired and property in their hands and any delay in<br \/>\nsettlement and disbursement whereof should be viewed seriously and<br \/>\ndealt with severely by imposing penalty in the form of payment of<br \/>\ninterest.  Withholding of quarters allotted, while in service, even after<br \/>\nretirement without vacating the same has been viewed to be not a<br \/>\nvalid ground to withhold the disbursement of the terminal benefits.<br \/>\nSuch is the position with reference to amounts due towards Provident<br \/>\nFund, which is rendered immune from attachment and deduction or<br \/>\nadjustment as against any other dues from the employee.\t In the<br \/>\ncontext of this, mere reliance on behalf of the appellant upon yet<br \/>\nanother decision of a different Division Bench of the very High Court<br \/>\nrendered without taking note of any of the earlier decisions of this<br \/>\ncourt but merely proceeding to decide the issue upon equitable<br \/>\nconsiderations of balancing conflicting claims of respective parties<br \/>\nbefore it does not improve the case of the appellant any further.<br \/>\nReliance placed for the appellant university on the decision reported<br \/>\nin JT 2000 Suppl. (1) SC 515 (Supra) does not also sound well on the<br \/>\nfacts and circumstances of this case.  It is not clear from the facts<br \/>\nrelating to the said decision as to whether the person concerned was<br \/>\nallowed to remain in occupation on receipt of the normal rent as in the<br \/>\npresent case.  As noticed earlier, the case of the contesting<br \/>\nrespondent in this case is that the university authorities regularly<br \/>\naccepted the rent at normal rates every month from the petitioner till<br \/>\nthe quarters was vacated and that in spite of request made for the<br \/>\nallotment of the said quarters in favour of the son of the respondent,<br \/>\nwho is in the service of the university, no decision seems to have<br \/>\nbeen taken and communicated though it is now claimed in the Court<br \/>\nproceedings that he is not entitled to this type of accommodation.<br \/>\nFurther, the facts disclosed such as the resolutions of the university<br \/>\nresolving to waive penal rent from all Teachers as well as that of the<br \/>\nExecutive Council dated 18.7.1994 and the actual such waiver made<br \/>\nin the case of several others cannot be easily ignored.\t The lethargy<br \/>\nshown by the authorities in not taking any action according to law to<br \/>\nenforce their right to recover possession of the quarters from the<br \/>\nrespondent or fix liability or determine the so-called penal rent after<br \/>\ngiving prior show-cause notice or any opportunity to him before ever<br \/>\neven proceeding to recover the same from the respondent renders<br \/>\nthe claim for penal rent not only a seriously disputed or contested<br \/>\nclaim but the university cannot be allowed to recover summarily the<br \/>\nalleged dues according to its whims in a vindictive manner by<br \/>\nadopting different and discriminatory standards.  The facts disclosed<br \/>\nalso show that it is almost one year after the vacation of the quarter<br \/>\nand that too on the basis of certain subsequent orders increasing the<br \/>\nrates of penal rent, the applicability of which to the respondent itself<br \/>\nwas again seriously disputed and to some extent justifiably too, the<br \/>\nappellant cannot be held to be entitled to recover by way of<br \/>\nadjustment such disputed sums or claims against the pension,<br \/>\ngratuity and provident fund amounts indisputably due and<br \/>\nunquestionably payable to the respondent before us.  The claims of<br \/>\nthe university cannot be said to be in respect of an admitted or<br \/>\nconceded claim or sum due.  Therefore, we are of the view that no<br \/>\ninfirmity or illegality could be said to be vitiated the order, under<br \/>\nchallenge in this appeal, to call for our interference, apart from the<br \/>\nfurther reason that the disbursements have already been said to have<br \/>\nbeen made in this case as per the decision of the High Court.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tThe appeal fails and, therefore, shall stand dismissed.\t No<br \/>\ncosts.\tWe make it clear that this shall not have the effect of<br \/>\nforeclosing the rights of the university, if any, if the appellant chose to<br \/>\nworkout the same, as is permissible in law.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\tJ.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\t [ S. Rajendra Babu ]<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\tJ.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\t\t\t\t\t [ Doraiswamy Raju ]<br \/>\nAugust 7, 2001.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India Gorakhpur University &amp; Ors vs Dr. Shitla Prasad Nagendra &amp; Ors on 7 August, 2001 Author: Raju Bench: S. Rajendra Babu, Doraiswamy Raju CASE NO.: Appeal (civil) 1874 of 1999 PETITIONER: GORAKHPUR UNIVERSITY &amp; ORS. Vs. RESPONDENT: DR. SHITLA PRASAD NAGENDRA &amp; ORS. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 07\/08\/2001 BENCH: S. Rajendra Babu [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-190206","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Gorakhpur University &amp; Ors vs Dr. Shitla Prasad Nagendra &amp; Ors on 7 August, 2001 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gorakhpur-university-ors-vs-dr-shitla-prasad-nagendra-ors-on-7-august-2001\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Gorakhpur University &amp; Ors vs Dr. Shitla Prasad Nagendra &amp; Ors on 7 August, 2001 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gorakhpur-university-ors-vs-dr-shitla-prasad-nagendra-ors-on-7-august-2001\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2001-08-06T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-01-26T10:30:11+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/gorakhpur-university-ors-vs-dr-shitla-prasad-nagendra-ors-on-7-august-2001#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/gorakhpur-university-ors-vs-dr-shitla-prasad-nagendra-ors-on-7-august-2001\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Gorakhpur University &amp; Ors vs Dr. Shitla Prasad Nagendra &amp; Ors on 7 August, 2001\",\"datePublished\":\"2001-08-06T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-01-26T10:30:11+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/gorakhpur-university-ors-vs-dr-shitla-prasad-nagendra-ors-on-7-august-2001\"},\"wordCount\":1847,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/gorakhpur-university-ors-vs-dr-shitla-prasad-nagendra-ors-on-7-august-2001#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/gorakhpur-university-ors-vs-dr-shitla-prasad-nagendra-ors-on-7-august-2001\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/gorakhpur-university-ors-vs-dr-shitla-prasad-nagendra-ors-on-7-august-2001\",\"name\":\"Gorakhpur University &amp; Ors vs Dr. Shitla Prasad Nagendra &amp; Ors on 7 August, 2001 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2001-08-06T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-01-26T10:30:11+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/gorakhpur-university-ors-vs-dr-shitla-prasad-nagendra-ors-on-7-august-2001#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/gorakhpur-university-ors-vs-dr-shitla-prasad-nagendra-ors-on-7-august-2001\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/gorakhpur-university-ors-vs-dr-shitla-prasad-nagendra-ors-on-7-august-2001#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Gorakhpur University &amp; Ors vs Dr. Shitla Prasad Nagendra &amp; Ors on 7 August, 2001\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Gorakhpur University &amp; Ors vs Dr. Shitla Prasad Nagendra &amp; Ors on 7 August, 2001 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gorakhpur-university-ors-vs-dr-shitla-prasad-nagendra-ors-on-7-august-2001","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Gorakhpur University &amp; Ors vs Dr. Shitla Prasad Nagendra &amp; Ors on 7 August, 2001 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gorakhpur-university-ors-vs-dr-shitla-prasad-nagendra-ors-on-7-august-2001","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2001-08-06T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-01-26T10:30:11+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gorakhpur-university-ors-vs-dr-shitla-prasad-nagendra-ors-on-7-august-2001#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gorakhpur-university-ors-vs-dr-shitla-prasad-nagendra-ors-on-7-august-2001"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Gorakhpur University &amp; Ors vs Dr. Shitla Prasad Nagendra &amp; Ors on 7 August, 2001","datePublished":"2001-08-06T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-01-26T10:30:11+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gorakhpur-university-ors-vs-dr-shitla-prasad-nagendra-ors-on-7-august-2001"},"wordCount":1847,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gorakhpur-university-ors-vs-dr-shitla-prasad-nagendra-ors-on-7-august-2001#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gorakhpur-university-ors-vs-dr-shitla-prasad-nagendra-ors-on-7-august-2001","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gorakhpur-university-ors-vs-dr-shitla-prasad-nagendra-ors-on-7-august-2001","name":"Gorakhpur University &amp; Ors vs Dr. Shitla Prasad Nagendra &amp; Ors on 7 August, 2001 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2001-08-06T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-01-26T10:30:11+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gorakhpur-university-ors-vs-dr-shitla-prasad-nagendra-ors-on-7-august-2001#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gorakhpur-university-ors-vs-dr-shitla-prasad-nagendra-ors-on-7-august-2001"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/gorakhpur-university-ors-vs-dr-shitla-prasad-nagendra-ors-on-7-august-2001#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Gorakhpur University &amp; Ors vs Dr. Shitla Prasad Nagendra &amp; Ors on 7 August, 2001"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/190206","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=190206"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/190206\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=190206"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=190206"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=190206"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}