Bombay High Court
Ratnadeep Ayurvedic Medical College ... vs The State Of Maharashtra Through The ... on 30 January, 2025
Author: Mangesh S. Patil
Bench: Mangesh S. Patil
2025:BHC-AUG:2510-DB
(1)
WP 4626.2024 & ors.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 4626 OF 2024
1. Jamkhed Homeopathic Medical College,
Ratnapur at Jamkhed, Ratnapur,
Taluka Jamkhed, Dist. Ahmednagar
2. Ratnadeep Medical Foundation And
Research Center and Ratnadeep
Hospital, Nagar Road, Ratnapur,
Taluka Jamkhed, Dist. Ahmednagar
Through Secretary
Dr. Varsha Bhaskar More
Age : 48 yrs, occ : medical practitioner
R/o Ratnadeep Hospital,Nagar Road,
Near Bus Stand, Jamkhed,
Taluka Jamkhed, Dist. Ahmednagar Petitioners
Versus
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through Secretary for Medical
Education and Drugs Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai
2. The Maharashtra University of
Health Science, Nashik, Dindori
Road, Mhasrool, Nashik
Through its Registrar. Respondents
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 4642 OF 2024
1. Ratnadeep Ayurvedic Medical
College, Ratnapur, Taluka Jamkhed,
Dist. Ahmednagar
2. Ratnadeep Medical Foundation And
Research Center and Ratnadeep
Hospital, Nagar Road, Ratnapur,
Taluka Jamkhed, Dist. Ahmednagar
(2)
WP 4626.2024 & ors.odt
Through Secretary
Dr. Varsha Bhaskar More
Age : 48 yrs, occ : medical practitioner
R/o Ratnadeep Hospital,Nagar Road,
Near Bus Stand, Jamkhed,
Taluka Jamkhed, Dist. Ahmednagar Petitioners
Versus
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through Secretary for Medical
Education and Drugs Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai
2. The Maharashtra University of
Health Science, Nashik, Dindori
Road, Mhasrool, Nashik
Through its Registrar. Respondents
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 4764 OF 2024
1. Shree Sai Nursing (B.Sc.) College
At Jamkhed, Ratnapur,
Taluka Jamkhed, Dist. Ahmednagar
2. Ratnadeep Medical Foundation And
Research Center and Ratnadeep
Hospital, Nagar Road, Ratnapur,
Taluka Jamkhed, Dist. Ahmednagar
Through Secretary
Dr. Varsha Bhaskar More
Age : 48 yrs, occ : medical practitioner
R/o Ratnadeep Hospital,Nagar Road,
Near Bus Stand, Jamkhed,
Taluka Jamkhed, Dist. Ahmednagar Petitioners
Versus
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through Secretary for Medical
Education and Drugs Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai
(3)
WP 4626.2024 & ors.odt
2. The Maharashtra University of
Health Science, Nashik, Dindori
Road, Mhasrool, Nashik
Through its Registrar. Respondents
...
Mr. V.D. Hon, Senior Advocate, i/b Mr. A.V. Hon,
Advocate for the petitioners.
Ms. P.J. Bharad, A.G.P. for respondent No.1 and 2.
Mr. A.S. Bayas, Advocate for respondent No.2.
...
CORAM : MANGESH S. PATIL &
PRAFULLA S. KHUBALKAR, JJ.
JUDGMENT RESERVED ON : 25.11.2024
JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED ON : 30.01.2025
Judgment (Mangesh S. Patil, J.) :
. Heard. Rule in all the writ petitions. It is made
returnable forthwith. Learned A.G.P. waives service for
respondent No.1 and learned Advocate Mr. Bayas waives
service for respondent No.2 - Maharashtra University of Health
Science (MUHS).
2. By way of these separate petitions preferred under
Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the same Management
running Homeopathy, Ayurvedic and Nursing Colleges
affiliated to respondent No.2 university, is challenging similar
communication dated 26.04.2024, whereby, for the selfsame
reasons, affiliation of the petitioner's all these colleges has
been permanently withdrawn under Section 73 of the
WP 4626.2024 & ors.odt
Maharashtra University of Health Sciences Act, 1998 (MUHS
Act) from the academic year 2024-2025 onwards.
3. Since the grounds for withdrawal of affiliation are
the same, all these petitions are being disposed of by this
common judgment, to avoid rigmarole.
4. Mr. Hon, learned senior advocate for the petitioners
takes us through the papers and submits that the impugned
decisions permanently withdrawing affiliation, are arbitrary
and illegal. The decisions suffer from vice of being contrary to
the principles of natural justice and are liable to be quashed
and set aside.
5. Mr. Hon would submit that the institutions were
being smoothly run for number of years and at no point of
time, any objection was raised either by the respondent MUHS
or the parent bodies. It is only in the beginning of the year
2024, when the colleges started demanding tuition fees from
and out of scholarships received by several students under
different schemes, that the students started agitation which
was blown out of proportion. There was political interference
and without any authority, the Collector moved in action. The
entire premises was sealed. President of the trust was
WP 4626.2024 & ors.odt
maliciously prosecuted by couple of girl students.
Simultaneously, all the affiliating universities and boards
including the respondent MUHS also moved in action in
respect of different affiliations. The premises of the petitioner's
college was put under seal of the Tahsildar. Simultaneously all
these universities/boards started issuing notices, hurriedly
calling upon the petitioners to furnish the explanations. No
sufficient opportunity was being extended. Even while the
premises was sealed, the institutions were stated to have been
not running, which was impossible. Even when the
explanations were offered, those were not considered in the
proper perspective and the issue was prejudged. The decisions
to withdraw affiliation was reached without following due
process of law and are liable to be quashed and set aside.
6. Mr. Hon would also advert our attention to the
decisions of this Court in few other matters of the petitioner
institution in respect of some other courses affiliated to
Savitribai Phule Pune University wherein similar actions were
set aside.
7. The learned A.G.P. submitted that due process of
law has been followed by respondent No.2 MUHS and this
Court, in exercise of the powers under Article 226 of the
WP 4626.2024 & ors.odt
Constitution of India, cannot sit in appeal and should only be
concerned with the decision making process and not its
correctness.
8. Learned advocate Mr. Bayas for the respondent
university, referring to the affidavit in reply, additional affidavit
and written notes of arguments, would submit that necessary
procedure as contemplated under Section 73 of the MUHS Act
has been duly followed. The conclusions are based on not one
but two inspections and pursuant to the inspection reports.
The petitioner was called upon to respond, by extending the
time stipulated under that provision. A personal hearing was
also conducted and after consideration of the issue by the
planning committee, the academic council of the university
made recommendation which is approved by the Vice
Chancellor. He would, therefore, submit that the procedure
contemplated in law has been meticulously followed.
9. On facts, Mr. Bayas would submit that several
shortcomings were noticed during the inspection which were
not satisfactorily explained by the petitioners. Though three
different colleges were being run, they were not having
separate area and infrastructure as per the norms. Not only
these three courses, but few other courses were being run
WP 4626.2024 & ors.odt
from the same building. There were no permanent signages
because those used to be changed if and when the concerned
apex body was to undertake the inspection. There was no
adequate staff. There were no patients. Realizing that the
institution was misleading the respondent university and other
establishments as well, by running different courses showing
the same infrastructure and having undertaken objective
scrutiny and having reached a reasoned conclusion, that
continuation of affiliation would adversely affect reputation of
the university, that the decision was taken for permanently
withdrawing the affiliations of all the three colleges of the
petitioner. There is no arbitrariness or illegality.
10. We have considered the rival submissions and
perused the papers.
11. At the outset, it would be apposite to remind
ourselves of the circumscribing limits while exercising the
powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The
matter in issue being withdrawal of the affiliation to the
respondent MUHS, these being the matters pertaining to the
standard of education, to be imparted and the responsibility of
which vests with it, there would be inherent limitation on the
powers of this Court in scrutinizing the decisions of the MUHS
WP 4626.2024 & ors.odt
in taking recourse to Section 73 and for withdrawing the
affiliations permanently. We shall be concerned with the
decision making process and we cannot sit in appeal.
12. With this preface, let us take up the issue. Section
73 of MUHS Act reads as under :
"73. Withdrawal of affiliation or recognition.
(1) If an affiliated college or recognised institution fails
to comply with the conditions of affiliation or recognition
as provided in section 63 or to allow the local managing
or advisory committee as provided in section 67 to
function properly or to take action as per direction issued
under this Act or if it is conducting the college or
recognised institution in a manner prejudicial to the
interest of the University or the standards laid down by it,
the Planning Board may issue a notice to the
management to show cause as to why the privileges
conferred on the college or recognised institution by
affiliation or recognition should not be withdrawn in part
or in whole or modified.
(2) The Planning Board shall mention in the notice,
the grounds on which it proposes to take the action, as
proposed in sub-section (1) and shall send a copy of the
notice to the principal of the college, or head of recognised
institution. It shall also specify in the notice, the period,
being a period which shall not be less than thirty days,
within which the management should file its written
statement in reply to the notice.
(3) On receipt of such written statement or on expiry
of the period specified in the notice issued under sub-
section (1), the Planning Board shall place before the
Academic Council, the notice and the written statement,
if any, with or without the motion for withdrawal or
modification of such privileges.
(4) The Academic Council shall, having regard to the
interest of students studying in the colleges or recognised
institutions, recommend to the Vice-Chancellor the action
to be taken in this behalf and the Vice-Chancellor shall,
thereafter, proceed to implement the recommendations".
So far as the process contemplated therein is
WP 4626.2024 & ors.odt
concerned, the planning committee of the MUHS, pursuant to
the two inspections carried out, one by one man committee
and the other by three member committee, called upon the
petitioners by its notice dated 20.03.2024, to show cause as to
why affiliation to its colleges shall not be withdrawn
permanently by resorting to Section 73. As contemplated
therein, time of 30 days was granted to furnish the
explanation. There is also record to demonstrate that the
petitioners, by moving applications, sought time to file replies.
In order to extend an opportunity of being heard and to
consider the explanation to be furnished, by issuing a notice
dated 12.04.2024, the petitioners were called upon to attend
the hearing on 22.04.2024. Admittedly, the petitioner
institutions' secretary together with a faculty member and a
staff remained present before the planning committee together
with their written explanation dated 19.04.2024.
13. True it is that simultaneously, the Collector of the
District had also moved in action and even took initiative in
appointing a committee for carrying out the inspection and
copies of the reports were forwarded to different
establishments / universities. Premises was also sealed and
pursuant to the order of this Court dated 27.03.2024 in
WP 4626.2024 & ors.odt
another matter, the Tahsildar was directed to conduct a
panchnama and de-seal the premises and hand over the keys
to the secretary of the trust. It is also equally true that like
the MUHS even Savitribai Phule Pune University and the
Directorate of Higher and Technical Education, also moved in
action in respect of the colleges / courses affiliated to them.
Even they made a similar attempt to de-affiliate / de-recognize
those colleges / courses. The actions were challenged before
this Court in couple of writ petitions namely writ petition
No.9709 of 2024 and writ petition No. 3286 of 2024 and the
petitioners' challenges therein were upheld by the judgments
dated 24.09.2024 and 27.09.2024, respectively. Admittedly,
the actions of the respective University / Board were subjected
to scrutiny under the relevant enactments in holding that the
processes as was laid down in the concerned Acts were not
followed. Since the MUHS is governed by the MUHS Act and
the impugned actions have been taken in purported exercise of
power under Section 73 thereof, the decisions of this Court, in
the aforementioned two matters, would be of no relevance.
14. Coming back to the matter in hand, the planning
committee of the respondent university conducted hearing in
presence of secretary of the petitioner trust on 22.04.2024. It
WP 4626.2024 & ors.odt
also recorded the minutes and those were placed before the
academic council. The inspection report of three member
committee was objectively considered and de-affiliation was
recommended, which has been approved by the Vice
Chancellor, as is contemplated in law. Therefore, it can safely
be said that the process as contemplated in law under the
provision of Section 73 of the MUHS Act, was strictly complied
with.
15. As regards the objective scrutiny of the
shortcomings, it was found that all the three courses
Ayurvedic, Homeopathy and Nursing, were being conducted
from the same property, extent of which was barely 6 Acres 84
Gunthas when as per the norms, Ayurvedic college requires
minimum of 5 Acres, Homeopathy college requires minimum of
4 Acres and for Nursing college, the requirement is of 2 Acres.
It was also noticed that the proposals for starting these
colleges were moved in different years and by showing the
same property. No dedicated hospitals required for all the
three courses were available. No permanent name plates /
signages were found. The departments were being used
interchangeably and taking into account inter alia several
other shortcomings, as a cumulative effect, the
WP 4626.2024 & ors.odt
recommendations for de-affiliation were forwarded by the
academic council and were accepted by the Vice Chancellor.
16. In our considered view, there is not enough material
to demonstrate any flaw in the decision making process or the
decision to withdraw the affiliations permanently, is either
arbitrary or perverse.
17. There is no merit in the petitions and those are
dismissed.
18. Rule stands discharged.
(PRAFULLA S. KHUBALKAR) (MANGESH S. PATIL)
JUDGE JUDGE
VD_Dhirde
