Back
2025 Supreme(All) 3214
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
MANISH MATHUR, J.
Jai Maa Barahi Mahavidyalaya, Gonda Thru. Manager Manju Shukla – Appellant
versus
Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia Avadh University, Ayodhya Thru. Vice Chancellor – Respondent
WRIT - C No. - 67 of 2025
Decided on : 06-01-2025
For the Appellant : Aditya Tiwari
For the Respondent: Akhilesh Kumar Srivastava
Educational institutions must comply with affiliation conditions; conducting classes without necessary approvals constitutes misrepresentation and fraud.
Headnote:(A) U.P. State Universities Act, 1973 - Section 37(2) - Petition for mandamus to allow students to appear in examinations despite non-approval of teaching staff - Conditions for affiliation necessitate adherence to university regulations - College conducted classes and admitted students without requisite approvals, amounting to misrepresentation and fraud. (Paras 5, 6, 9, 13)
(B) Educational Institutions - Conduct of classes and admission of students without necessary approvals - Institutions must comply with conditions of affiliation or be subject to consequences. (Paras 6, 13)
Facts of the case:
Petition filed by an educational institution seeking to allow students to appear for examinations despite not obtaining official approval for teachers from the University, impacting 45 enrolled students. (Paras 4, 5)
Findings of Court:
College required to refund students' fees with interest and pay damages for misrepresentation within six months. (Paras 14, 15)
Issues: Legality of the college's conduct in admitting students without university approval and the resulting implications of such actions. (Paras 9, 13)
Ratio Decidendi: The college could not deviate from the conditions of their temporary affiliation and had committed fraud by admitting students without fulfilling mandatory conditions. (Paras 6, 13)
Result: Petition dismissed with directions for fee refund and damages.
JUDGMENT :
Manish Mathur, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for petitioner and Mr. Akhilesh Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for opposite party.
2. Petition has been filed seeking the following relief:-
"(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the opposite party/University to allow the Students of the petitioner's Institution provisionally to appear in the upcoming semester examination of Post Graduate Courses starting from 09.01.2025 subject to the conditions imposed by this Hon'ble Court as well as University, in the interest of justice. .............."
3. Learned counsel for petitioner has submitted that in terms of the temporary affiliation order, the requisite formalities pertaining to appointment of teacher and forwarding their credential to the University was completed within a period of one month as prescribed but despite the college adhering to the same, no approval was forthcoming from the University concerned. It is further submitted that upon repeated representations having been made, the petitioner's Institution was required to submit an affidavit before the University for provisional conduct of classes subject to final approval of teaching staff. It is submitted that such an affidavit was submitted by the Institution whereafter students were admitted and classes were conducted.
4. It is submitted that the Institution is not at fault for delay on the part of University in granting approval to the teachers appointed and it is in such extenuating circumstances that classes were conducted and in case relief is not granted, it would affect the career of 45 students enrolled with the college.
5. Upon consideration of submissions advanced and perusal of material on record, it appears that in terms of Section 37(2) of the U.P. State Universities Act, 1973, any college may be admitted to privileges of affiliation in case such a college fulfills such conditions of affiliation as are prescribed. It is in terms of the aforesaid statutory provision that the temporary affiliation order has been issued for petitioner's Institution with specific bar pertaining to conduct of classes until and unless the teaching staff is granted approval by the University.
6. Once the Institution is seeking benefit of the affiliation order, it would be bound by the principles of approbate and reprobate and cannot resile from the specific bar indicated in the affiliation order pertaining to conduct of classes only after approval of the teaching staff.
7. Even as per admission of the petitioner itself, such an approval has not been granted by the University till date and therefore the conduct of classes without fulfilling such mandatory condition is clearly against the norms prescribed in the affiliation order itself.
8. Learned counsel for petitioner has not been able to indicate any provision of law or order whereby it was authorized to admit students and conduct classes for which generation of UIN code is being sought.
9. In such circumstances, where the college itself does not fulfill the essential condition required for affiliation or even for enlargement of affiliation, there does not appear to be any occasion to grant any such relief as has been sought in the petition.
10. So far as the orders relied upon by learned counsel for petitioner seeking parity are concerned, the same clearly indicate the fact that the benefit was provided as a one time measure with a direction being given to the University to open the portal on 06.12.2024 for purposes of generation of UIN code. The said date has already expired.
11. Learned counsel for petitioner however disputes the fact that the portal was open by University on 06.12.2024. The said aspect is completely irrelevant in view of discussion made hereinabove.
12. It is also evident that despite having knowledge of such a specific condition in the affiliation order, the Institution has admitted students and conducted classes. The record does not make it evident that any information was prov
