Uttarakhand High Court
SPA/22/2024 on 24 January, 2024
Author: Vivek Bharti Sharma
Bench: Vivek Bharti Sharma
Office Notes,
reports, orders or
SL. proceedings or
Date COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No directions and
Registrar's order
with Signatures
SPA No.22 of 2024
Hon'ble Vivek Bharti Sharma, J.
Mr. Jatinder Kumar Sethi, Advocate (through
V.C.) with Mr. Kanti Ram for the appellant-
University.
2. Mr. Jitendra Chaudhary, Advocate with
Mr. Siddhartha Sah, Advocate for respondent
no.1-College.
3. Mr. J.C. Pandey, Standing Counsel for the
State/respondent nos.2 and 3.
4. Ms. Anjali Bhargava, Advocate (through
V.C.) for respondent no.4.
5. This intra court appeal is filed by the
appellant-University against the order dated
11.01.2024 passed by a learned Single Judge of
this Court, whereby the learned Single Judge had
directed the appellant-University, as an interim
measure, to issue a provisional notification in
respect of grant of autonomous status to the
respondent no.1-College in compliance to the
directions issued by the UGC in its letter dated
13.11.2023 within a period of one week. It was
also directed that the said provisional notification
shall be subject to the final decision of the writ
petition.
6. Misc. application IA No.3/2024 is allowed.
Counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondent
no.1-College is taken on record.
7. Learned counsel for the appellant-
University prays for time to file rejoinder
affidavit.
8. However, learned counsel for respondent
no.1-College would submit that interim order
granted by Hon'ble Vacation Judge dated
17.01.2024 should not be extended further as the
learned Single Judge, after comprehensive
hearing, had passed the order dated 11.01.2024
thereby directing the present appellant-
University to issue provisional notification to
respondent no.1-College as mandated in
Regulation 4.2 of University Grants Commission
(Conferment of Autonomous Status Upon
Colleges and Measures for Maintenance of
Standards in Autonomous Colleges) Regulations,
2023 (hereinafter referred to as the 'UGC
Regulations, 2023).
9. He would further submit that due to non-
issuance of notification as per Regulation 4.2 of
UGC Regulations, 2023, the respondent no.1-
College shall suffer irreparable loss as the
deadline for applying for the new courses for All
India Council for Technical Education ends on
31.01.2024.
10. He would further submit that after grant of
autonomous status to the respondent no.1-
College by the UGC, issuance of notification is
merely a formality.
11. Per contra, learned counsel for the
appellant-University would submit that the
impugned order dated 11.01.2024 was obtained
by respondent no.1-College by concealment of
facts, misrepresentation and fraud.
He would further submit that the
appellant/University has to apply its mind prior
and post conferment of autonomous status by
UGC (respondent no.4) and it is only on the
subjective satisfaction of the University i.e.
appellant that the respondent no.1-College meets
the eligibility criteria set by it only then a
notification granting autonomous status can be
issued. He would further submit that a review
request of the appellant-University regarding
grant of autonomous status is presently pending
with the UGC.
12. On the other hand, learned counsel for
respondent no.1-College would place reliance on
the judgment of Madras High Court in re The
Anna University vs. Mahendra Institute of
Technology and another, 2020 SC OnLine Mad
27850 and would refer paragraph 13 that
University Grant Commission is under no
obligation in law to be bound by the orders passed
by the University as University Grants
Commission has been given the authority under
the Regulations to undertake this exercise itself
and then grant or refuse the autonomous status to
an affiliated College; that, the University Grants
Commission is the sole body now empowered to
take a final decision with regard to the grant of
autonomous status after getting an opinion of the
University and the State Government, if any.
He would further submit that, even
otherwise, this intra court appeal filed against the
order of learned Single Judge, is not maintainable,
therefore, stay on the operation of impugned order
dated 17.01.2024 need not to be extended.
Besides, he would submit that in the
impugned order learned Single Judge has merely
directed to issue a provisional notification to the
respondent no.1-College and has also clarified that
this provisional notification shall be subject to the
final decision of the writ petition.
12. Considered and perused the material
available on file.
13. Appellant is granted two weeks time to file
rejoinder affidavit, if any.
14. List on 15.02.2024.
(Vivek Bharti Sharma, J.)
Vacation Judge
24.01.2024
Rajni
