Bombay High Court
Shri. Shivaji Education Society, ... vs Maha. University Of Health ... on 30 August, 2016
Bench: V.A. Naik
WP 6748/15 1 Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
WRIT PETITION No. 6748/2015
1. Shri Shivaji Education Society, Amravati
(Maharashtra State),
Through its President,
Shivaji Nagar, Amravati : 444 603.
2. Dr.Punjabrao alias Bhausaheb Deshmukh
Memorial Medical College,
Acting through its Dean, Shivaji Nagar,
Amravati : 444 603. PETITIONERS
.....VERSUS.....
Maharashtra University of Health Sciences,
Through its Registrar, Mhasrul, Vani Road,
Nashik. RESPONDENT
Shri S.V. Purohit, counsel for the petitioners.
Shri A.L. Deshpande, counsel for the respondent.
CORAM :SMT. VASANTI A NAIK AND
KUM. INDIRA JAIN, JJ.
DATE : 30 TH AUGUST, 2016.
ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : SMT.VASANTI A NAIK, J.)
RULE. Rule made returnable forthwith. The petition is heard
finally at the stage of admission with the consent of the learned counsel
for the parties.
2. By this writ petition, the petitioner-Education Society
challenges the communications issued by the respondent-Maharashtra
University of Health Sciences, Nashik, cancelling the admission of the
eleven students that are admitted by the petitioner no.2-College in the
Post Graduate courses during the academic session 2014-15 if the fine of
Rupees Eleven Lakhs is not paid.
WP 6748/15 2 Judgment
3. The petitioner no.1-Education Society runs several
educational institutions for imparting higher education. In the medical
college run by the petitioner no.1-Society, permission was granted by the
Medical Council of India since the year 2011-12, for conducting the Post
Graduate courses. Initially, permission was granted for starting the Post
Graduate courses in eleven subjects and from the subsequent academic
session, i.e. 2012-13, permission was granted to start the Post Graduate
courses in four additional subjects. In the year 2011-12, when the
petitioner no.1-Society admitted students in the petitioner no.2-College
for the Post Graduate courses, the respondent-University cancelled the
admissions on the ground that the State Government had not granted
permission for the said courses and the affiliation of the university was
not secured. The petitioners challenged the said action of the respondent-
University in Writ Petition No.3888 of 2011. This Court had, by the
judgment dated 01.10.2011, allowed the writ petition filed by the
petitioners and held that there was no illegality in the action of the
petitioner no.1-Society in admitting the students in the Post Graduate
medical courses, after securing the necessary permission from the Medical
Council of India. The Court held that the permission of the State
Government and the affiliation of the respondent-University would be a
mere formality after the Medical Council of India grants permission to
start the courses and the action on the part of the respondent-University
of debarring the colleges from admitting the students is bad in law.
WP 6748/15 3 Judgment
Though the question involved in the writ petition was kept open in
the special leave petition filed by the respondent-University before
the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the special leave petition was dismissed.
In the next year, the respondent-University again took a similar action
and the said action was also challenged by the petitioners in Writ
Petition No.5977 of 2012. A similar order like the one passed in
Writ Petition No.3888 of 2011, was passed in Writ Petition No.5977 of
2012, while allowing the said writ petition. In the Hon'ble Supreme
Court also, a similar order like the one passed in the earlier special
leave petition, was passed. Despite the two aforesaid orders, the
respondent-University has taken a similar action in respect of the
admissions made in the Post Graduate courses in the petitioner no.2-
Medical college run by the petitioner no.1-Society during the
academic session 2014-15. The said action on the part of the respondent-
University is challenged by the petitioner no.1-Society in the instant
petition.
4. Shri Purohit, the learned counsel for the petitioners,
submitted that despite the decision of this Court that the requirement
of securing an affiliation from the respondent-University and the
permission from the State Government would be a mere formality after
the society secures permission from the Medical Council of India to start
a particular Post Graduate courses in medicine, the respondent-University
WP 6748/15 4 Judgment
has taken a similar action against the petitioner-Society. It is submitted
that the university is not justified in asking a fine of Rupees One Lakh
each, in respect of the eleven students that are admitted in the Post
Graduate courses on 10.07.2014. It is stated that the last date for
admitting the students in the Post Graduate medical courses was
extended till 10th of July and, hence, the petitioner no.1-Society admitted
the students on the said date. It is submitted that the petitioner no.1-
Society had sought the affiliation of the respondent-University on
25.10.2013 and provisional affiliation was granted after twenty days
from the date on which the petitioner no.1-Society admitted the
students in their college. It is submitted that if provisional affiliation
was granted to the Post Graduate courses, by the order dated 30.07.2014,
it is clear that the said affiliation was granted after due application of
mind. It is stated that in view of the judgments rendered by this Court in
the case of the petitioner no.1-Society and referred to hereinabove,
granting of affiliation would be a mere formality after the Medical
Council of India grants permission to run the Post Graduate courses. It is
submitted that in any case, since provisional affiliation is granted on
30.07.2014, there is no propriety in the action on the part of the
respondent-University in seeking the fine of Rupees Eleven Lakhs, i.e.
Rupees One Lakh per student, that are admitted in the Post Graduate
courses on 10.07.2014. It is stated that the conditional cancellation of
their admission is bad in law.
WP 6748/15 5 Judgment
5. Shri Deshpande, the learned counsel for the respondent-
University, submitted that though this Court had allowed the writ
petitions filed by the petitioners, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has kept the
point in respect of the requirement of affiliation from the university
before admitting the students, open. It is, however, fairly admitted that
provisional affiliation was granted for the Post Graduate medical courses
to the petitioner no.1-Society by the university on 30.07.2014, i.e. with
three weeks from the date of admission of the students in the college. It
is stated that if the medical colleges admit students before the affiliation
is granted, it would be necessary for the colleges to pay the fine as per the
resolution dated 24.11.2014.
6. On hearing the learned counsel for the parties and on a
perusal of the impugned orders, we find that the respondent-University
has committed a serious illegality in asking the petitioner no.1-Society to
pay the fine of Rupees Eleven Lakhs for the admission of eleven students
in the petitioner no.2-College before the grant of affiliation by the
respondent-University, or else their admission would stand cancelled. We
find that there is no authority in the respondent-University to seek a fine
of Rupees One Lakh each for regularization of the admission of the eleven
students. Without going into the correctness or otherwise of the
resolution passed by the respondent-University on 24.11.2014, we may
observe that the impugned action precedes the date of passing of the
WP 6748/15 6 Judgment
resolution as the petitioners are asked by the respondent-University to
pay the fine by an order dated 14.11.2014, that is impugned in the
instant petition. Since the resolution is passed after the impugned order
directing the petitioners to pay a fine of Rupees Eleven Lakhs is made, the
respondent-University cannot rely on the resolution as a source of power
for imposing the fine of Rupees Eleven Lakhs. Though we doubt whether
such a resolution could be passed, we need not go into that aspect of the
matter, in this writ petition. Though the case of the petitioners is
supported by the judgments referred to hereinabove, we find an
additional reason for granting the prayer made by the petitioners. It is
conspicuous to note that the petitioner no.2-College admitted the
students on 10.07.2014, which was the last date on which the admissions
could be granted and the provisional affiliation is granted on 30.07.2014.
If the provisional affiliation could be granted within three weeks from the
admission of the students, we fail to gauge why the provisional affiliation
could not be granted before the last date within which the students could
be admitted to the college. We find that in this case, though the
academic council had passed a resolution on 21.05.2014 that provisional
affiliation could be granted to the petitioner no.2-College, the provisional
affiliation was actually granted belatedly, on 30.07.2014. The action on
the part of the respondent-University in seeking a fine of Rupees Eleven
Lakhs as a condition for not cancelling the admission of the eleven
students is bad in law and cannot be sustained.
WP 6748/15 7 Judgment
7. Hence, for the reasons aforesaid, the writ petition is allowed.
The impugned orders are quashed and set aside.
Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms with no order as
to costs.
JUDGE JUDGE
APTE
WP 6748/15 8 Judgment
CERTIFICATE
I certify that this Judgment uploaded is a true and correct
copy of original signed Judgment.
Uploaded by: Rohit D. Apte. Uploaded on : 01.09.2016.
