AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
P. Sam Koshy, J
Before the petitioner started his argument the Counsel appearing for the respondent has raised an objection so far as the maintainability of the writ
petition .
The objection was that, since the respondent No. 1 Medical College was a private unaided institution therefore the petition as such may not be
maintainable. This objection has been raised by the respondents in their reply also at the initial stage itself.
In view of the categorical submissions made by the counsel for the respondent which has not been disputed by the petitioner, this Court taking into
consideration the judgment passed by this court in WP 532 of 1999 and WP 1948 of 1996 decided on 28.09.2015 is of the view that since the
respondent establishment do not receive any grant in aid from the State Government, therefore the respondents would not come within a purview of
State under Article 12 of Constitution of India. In the absence of receiving any aid from the State Government the status of respondent is purely a
private entity. It is settled position of law that writ can not be issued against a private entity. Moreover the dispute in the instant case is a pure
employer employee dispute which would not otherwise fall within the ambit of public law element as it is a contract of employment which is in dispute
between petitioner with the respondents.
Given the said fact, this court is of the opinion that the writ petition as such would not be maintainable. The non entertaining of the present writ
petition by this Court would not preclude the petitioner from challenging the said order before an appropriate forum if he so chooses.
The writ petition accordingly stands disposed off.