Constitution of India

— Art. 226 — New issue — Not to be gone into by High Court — Original application filed by respondent before State Administrative Tribunal for setting aside appointment of one D and for his own appointment to the post of Professor — Tribunal partly allowed the application by setting aside the appointment of D but rejected prayer for appointment of respondent — Tribunal's judgment not questioned by D but writ petition filed by respondent challenging the judgment so far as it related to his non-appointment — High Court affirmed the view of Tribunal that respondent's prayer regarding his appointment was untenable — But High Court accepted respondent's plea that during pendency of the original application before Tribunal and writ petition before High Court, some events had taken place which required adjudication of issue relating to appointment of appellant (Respondent 10 before it) as HOD and as Professor, even though High Court had categorically found that appellant's appointment was not challenged by the present respondent before the Tribunal — High Court held that appellant's appointment as HOD was illegal and he was required to satisfy the authority that he possessed requisite qualification to be entitled to continue in the post of Professor on regular basis — Held, High Court was not justified in considering a new case which was not the case of the parties before the Tribunal, (2006) 6 SCC 666