Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA, SANDEEP MEHTA, JJ.
CMJ Foundation And Others - Appellants
Versus
State Of Meghalaya And Others - Respondents
Civil Appeal No (s). 9694 of 2024, Civil Appeal No(S). 9695 of 2024
Decided on : 13-02-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. establishment of cmj university (Para 5) |
| 2. appointment of chancellor (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19) |
| 3. dissolution order (Para 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28) |
| 4. submissions on behalf of appellants (Para 29) |
| 5. submissions on behalf of respondent-state (Para 30 , 31 , 32) |
| 6. analysis of chancellor's appointment (Para 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 54) |
| 7. analysis of dissolution order (Para 55 , 56 , 57 , 58 , 59 , 60 , 61 , 62 , 63 , 64 , 65 , 66 , 67 , 68 , 69 , 71 , 72 , 73) |
| 8. final decision on appeals (Para 70) |
JUDGMENT :
Mehta, J.
For the convenience of exposition, this judgment is divided into the following parts: -
| INDEX |
| A. FACTUAL MATRIX |
| B. SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANTS |
| C. SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT-STATE |
| D. ISSUES FOR DETERMINATION |
| E. ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION |
| ISSUE No. I: “Whether the appointment of the Chancellor of the CMJ University was made with due adherence to the procedure, as mandated by law”? |
| ISSUE No. II: “Whether the dissolution order dated 31st March, 2014 was passed with due adherence to the procedure provided under Section 48 of the CMJ University Act, 2009 and in compliance of the directions issued by this Court vide order dated 13th September, 2013 in SLP(C) No. 19617 of 2013 titled as “CMJ Foundation & Ors. v. State of Meghalaya and Ors.”? |
| ISSUE No. III: “Whether the Division Bench of the High Court of Meghalaya was justified in remanding the matter to the learned Single Judge for reconsideration on merit, while allowing the Writ Appeal No. 14 of 2017”? |
| F. CONCLUSION |
1. Application for impleadment is allowed.
2. These appeals are filed challenging the judgment and order dated 6th May, 2021 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Meghalaya at Shillong1[Hereinafter, being referred to as ‘High Court’.] in Writ Appeal No. 14 of 2017, whereby the judgment and order dated 16th July, 2015 passed by the learned Single Judge of the High Court in Writ Petition(C) No. 177 of 2014 was quashed and set aside and the matter was remanded to the learned Single Judge to take appropriate decision regarding the validity of the order, dissolving the Chander Mohan Jha University2[Hereinafter, being referred to as the ‘CMJ University’.], on merit preferably within a period of six months.
3. Vide judgment and order dated 16th July, 2015, the learned Single Judge of the High Court quashed and set aside the order dated 31st March, 2014, passed by the Government of Meghalaya3[Hereinafter, being referred to as ‘State Government’.] dissolving the University and also quashed the show cause notices dated 12th November, 2013 and 24th January, 2014, issued to the University by the State Government.
4. This case has a chequered history. To properly appreciate the controversy involved in this case, it would be essential to set out the detailed facts, giving rise to these appeals.
A. FACTUAL MATRIX
5. A trust namely Chandra Mohan Jha Foundation4[Hereinafter, being referred to as ‘CMJ Foundation’.] was registered at Shillong, Meghalaya in the year 2004. The Meghalaya Legislative Assembly enacted the Chandra Mohan Jha University Act, 20095[The Chandra Mohan Jha University Act, 2009 (Act No. 4 of 2009). For short ‘the Act’.] on 20th July, 2009 to establish and incorporate the CMJ University in the State with an emphasis on providing high-quality and industry-relevant education in various subjects. 6[The subjects inter alia include, Physical Sciences, Life Sciences, Technology, Medical Science and Paramedical, Management, Finance & Accounting, Commerce, Humanities, Language & Communication, Applied and Performing Arts, Education, Law, Social Sciences and related areas and to provide matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.]
6. The Board of Trustees of the CMJ Foundation appointed Shri Chander Moha
The appointment of the Chancellor of CMJ University was invalid due to lack of Visitor's approval, and the dissolution order was upheld for procedural compliance.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of the provisions of Section 17(16) and (17) of the act of 1998 and the determination of the maintainability of the petitioner's....
The appointment of Vice-Chancellors must comply with statutory provisions and UGC regulations, ensuring lawful and independent decision-making by the Chancellor.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the State had the authority to pass appropriate directions under Section 19 of the West Bengal Universities and Colleges (Administration and R....
Appointment – Parameters to be applied to a case where an incumbent to a post does not fulfil qualifications prescribed for a post, are different from parameters to be applied to a case where no spec....
Appointment as Vice-Chancellor of University – While preparing panel, Search Committee must give proper weightage to academic excellence; exposure to higher education system in country and abroad, an....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of 'concurrence' of the State Government for the appointment of a Vice Chancellor under Section 14(4) of the Karnataka State Univers....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
