Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
Mangesh S. Patil, Shailesh P. Brahme, JJ.
Nisargdeep Shikshan Prasarak Mandal - Petitioner
Versus
The State of Maharashtra Through its Secretary, Higher and Technical Education Department and ors. – Respondents
Writ Petition No. 2093 of 2024
Decided On : 26-08-2024
Jurisdiction - Education - Maharashtra Public Universities Act 2016 - Sections 107, 109 - The court interpreted the provisions regarding the establishment of new colleges, emphasizing adherence to the perspective plan and the statutory procedure for granting Letters of Intent (LOIs).
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner challenged the issuance of Letters of Intent (LOIs) for new colleges at a location where it previously operated a college, claiming the process violated the Maharashtra Public Universities Act 2016 and lacked proper procedure.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the addition of the location in question to the annual plan was illegal as it was not included in the approved perspective plan, and the issuance of LOIs was not in compliance with the statutory requirements.
Issues: Whether the petitioner has locus standi, the legality of adding a new location to the annual plan, and the validity of the LOIs issued to the new colleges.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the perspective plan must be strictly adhered to, and any deviation in the process for granting LOIs undermines the statutory framework established by the Maharashtra Public Universities Act.
Result: The writ petition is allowed, quashing the communications and resolutions related to the issuance of LOIs to the new colleges.
JUDGMENT :
Shailesh P. Brahme, J.
1. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. With the consent of the parties, heard finally at the admission stage.
2. By way of present petition jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is invoked to challenge letter dated 22.09.2023, issued by respondent no. 1 inducting new locations for issuing Letter of Intent (hereinafter referred to as ‘LOI’ for the sake of brevity and convenience) for 2024-2025, government resolution dated 15.02.2024 issuing LOI to respondent nos. 3 and 4 and government resolution dated 15.07.2024 granting final approval to them. Petitioner is also seeking ancillary orders.
3. The controversy pertains to opening of a College at Chitte-Pimpalgaon, Taluka and District Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar. The LOI and final permission are regulated under Maharashtra Public Universities Act 2016 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Act’ for the sake of brevity and convenience). Respondent no. 6 is a faction of the office bearers who is at loggerhead with the Secretary of the petitioner. The petition is opposed by all the respondents.
Background of the petition :
4. The petitioner is a Registered Public Trust. It was issued with LOI to run Shri Tuljabhavani Arts and Science College on permanent non grant basis at Chitte-Pimpalgaon, Taluka and District Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar, vide government resolution dated 15.07.2024. Its College was given affiliation also which was continued up to 2020-2021.
5. As there were complaints, criminal cases against the office bearers and serious lapses, an enquiry was conducted by Committee appointed by University. Report was submitted by covering letter dated 23.08.2023, recommending withdrawal of affiliation. Consequently, the respondent no. 2 – University had withdrawn affiliation vide order dated 06.09.2022. It was challenged by the petitioner in Writ Petition No. 9809/2022 in the High Court which was dismissed on merits vide judgment and order dated 29.08.2023. Being aggrieved, Special Leave Petition was preferred which was also dismissed by Supreme Court on 06.10.2023.
6. The petitioner submitted applications to respondent no. 2 – University for renewal of affiliation and for providing password as all the defects have been removed. By way of our order dated 14.06.2024 passed in Civil Application No. 3460/2024, respondent no. 2 – University accepted the application of petitioner for affiliation. Later on, it was rejected and is under challenge in Writ Petition No. 8542/2024. Presently, we are not considering the said writ petition. The fact remains that petitioner is prosecuting independent remedy soliciting affiliation.
7. The petitioner also filed Writ Petition No. 5079/2022 challenging letter dated 22.04.2022 issued by Deputy Secretary of respondent no. 1 and notification – advertisement dated 25.04.2022, inviting proposals for opening new College at Chitte- Pimpalgaon. It is pending. It is claimed that presently petitioner does not have affiliation but it has infrastructure to run the College and the College has not been closed down. The subsequent developments paved way for the petitioner to prefer present matter.
Case of the petitioner.
8. Petitioner submitted applications to secure affiliation but those were not being considered by the University. By letter dated 22.09.2023, respondent no. 1 instructed respondent no. 2 – University to invite the proposals for newly added locations for opening of new Colleges for the year 2024-2025. The location of Chitte-Pimpalgaon where the petitioner was running College was one of the added locations. In pursuance of the letters dated 22.09.2023, respondent no. 1 addressed a letter dated 03.11.2023, thereby extending the date for submitting the proposals up to 15.11.2023. Respondent no. 4 submitted proposal. Respondent no. 3 did not submit any proposal at all.
9. Respondent no. 1 addressed letter dated 25.01.2024 to respondent no. 2 – University directing it to forward proposal of respondent no. 3. Responden
The court established that adherence to the perspective plan is mandatory for the issuance of Letters of Intent for new colleges under the Maharashtra Public Universities Act 2016.
The authority has discretion to reject educational proposals based on deficiencies, and such proposals cannot be considered after the relevant academic year has passed.
The exercise of discretion by the State Government under Section 109(3)(d) of the Maharashtra Public Universities Act, 2016 must be judicious and reasons must be recorded for granting or refusing Let....
Procedural compliance in educational affiliations is critical; failure to follow mandatory guidelines leads to nullification of approval for new colleges.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the government must have exceptional circumstances and valid reasons, recorded in writing, to overrule negative recommendations from the Unive....
The issuance of a Letter of Intent does not grant full-fledged permission to establish a University, and the Government is entitled to ensure compliance with the conditions before permitting the peti....
Notification for starting a new education institution - Permission for starting new colleges can be granted only to co-operative institutions, which have sufficient financial background and prior exp....
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
