Learned advocate for the petitioner could not point during the course of submission as to under what provision of law straightway the writ petition is maintainable against the principal of school whose characteristics and/or nature of constitution is not even mentioned in the memo of the petition.
Learned advocate for the petitioner could not indicate under which provision of law the petition is filed for the prayers mentioned in the memo of petition.
Learned advocate for the petitioner could not point out that under which provision of law and what type of direction could be issued to School whose constitution is not spelt out in the memo of the petition.
Learned advocate for the petitioner has not indicated in the memo of petition as to whether the petitioner has availed alternative remedy or not.
Learned advocate for the petitioner has made averment in paragraph no.5 of the petition on oath that petitioner has no other alternative equally efficacious remedy save and accept to approach this Court by way of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Prima facie there appears to be a remedy available which is not exhausted and, therefore, learned advocate need to address this issue also.
In view of the aforesaid, learned advocate for the petitioner has requested for time. At his request matter is kept on 10.05.2012.
(S.R.BRAHMBHATT, J.) Pankaj Top