Brilliant Institute Of ... vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 2382 MP

                                                                            1                             WP-26569-2018
                                                  The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                                                             WP-26569-2018
                                        (BRILLIANT INSTITUTE OF PROFESSIONAL STUDIES NIWARI Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                                           AND OTHERS)

                                        28
                                        Jabalpur, Dated : 15-06-2021
                                                 Heard through Video Conferencing.
                                                 Shri Sourabh Singh Thakur, learned counsel for the petitioner.
                                                 Shri Piyush Dharmadhikari, learned Government Advocate for the
                                        State.

                                                 Shri Atul Jain, learned counsel for respondent No.2.

The submission of counsel for the petitioner is that the executive council is not competent to fix the fee structure of affiliation and in terms of the Full Bench judgment of this Court reported in 2019 Vol. 1, MPLJ, 378 , it is the co-ordination committee which is empowered to fix the affiliation fee.

The submission of learned counsel for respondent no.2 is that respondent No.2 is a new University and the Vice Chancellor is competent to fix the fee in terms of Section 15-A of Madhya Pradesh Vishwavidyalaya Adhiniyam. He has drawn the attention of this Court to the Clause 4-B of the

Statute No.27 filed along with the additional reply in this regard and has also pointed out that the another writ petition i.e. W.P. No.9124/2020 involving the same issue is pending. He has also submitted that the petitioner has not paid the affiliation fee for the year 2017-2018 and 2018-2019 and the cheques in this regard have been bounced.

Having heard learned counsel for the parties, we have noticed that some of the documents which the learned counsel relying upon are not legible and that the similar issue is pending in another petition and, therefore, both the petitions are required to be heard analogously and that nothing has been pointed out to show that the fee for the earlier years has been paid.

Therefore, in the meanwhile, the deposit of fee as fixed by respondent No.2-University by the petitioner will be subject to the final outcome of the Signature Not Verified SAN present writ petition.

Digitally signed by ANAND KRISHNA SEN Date: 2021.06.17 11:04:59 IST 2 WP-26569-2018 List the case along with W.P. No.9124/2020 after two weeks.

                                           (PRAKASH SHRIVASTAVA)                             (VIRENDER SINGH)
                                                  JUDGE                                              JUDGE


                                        Tabish




Signature Not Verified
  SAN




Digitally signed by ANAND KRISHNA SEN
Date: 2021.06.17 11:04:59 IST