JODHPUR NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, JODHPUR VS. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR. (S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.7628/15) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
ORDERJODHPUR NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, JODHPUR VS. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR. (S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.7628/15) Dated: - 8th September, 2015. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SANGEET LODHA Mr.Sanajeev Prakash Sharma, Senior Advocate with Mr.Ankur Mathur, Mr.Ankit Sethi and Mr.Rajesh Kala, for the petitioner. Dr.P.S.Bhati,Additional Advocate General with Mr.S.S.Rathore, for the respondents.
1. This writ petition is directed against order dated 3.7.15 issued by the Principal Secretary, Higher Education, Government of Rajasthan, banning the admission of the students in Jodhpur National University (for short 'the University') during the academic session 2015-16.
2. The petitioner-University, a body corporate, has been constituted and established under the provisions of Jodhpur National University, Jodhpur Act, 2009 ( for short “the Act”. hereinafter). The objects of the University as set out under Section 4 of the Act, are to undertake research and studies in the disciplined specified in the Scheduled II attached to the Act, which includes the disciplines of Engineering and JODHPUR NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, JODHPUR VS. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR. (S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.7628/15) 2 Technology, Medicine and Health, Management, Pharmaceutical Sciences, Applied Sciences, Computer Application, Law and Education and such other disciplines as the University may with the prior approval of the State Government, determine from time to time and to achieve excellence and disseminate knowledge in the said disciplines. In furtherance of the objects specified, the University has already established Engineering College, Dental College, Pharmacy College, College of Management and is also conducting the undergraduate courses in Legal Education, after obtaining the permission from regulatory bodies such as All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE), Dental Council of India (DCI), Bar Council of India (BCI) etc. That apart, the University also started undergraduate courses in the non-professional non-technical courses namely, Arts, Commerce and Science in the year 2011 by imparting education to external students, who do not participate in regular curriculum and extra curriculum activities of the University, however, acquire their degree from the petitioner University.
3. The petitioner University is a self financed University, run by Kushal Education Trust, a Trust registered under the JODHPUR NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, JODHPUR VS. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR. (S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.7628/15) 3 Rajasthan Public Trust Act, 1959, which is referred to under the Act as 'Sponsoring Body'.
4. As per the provisions of Section 21, the authorities of the University shall be namely; the Board of Management, the Academic Council, the Faculties and such other authorities as may be declared by the Statutes to be the authorities of the University.
5. The Board of Management of the University, which is the principal executive body of the University, consists of the Chancellor, Vice-Chancellor, five persons nominated by Sponsoring Body out of whom two shall be eminent educationists, one expert of Management or Information Technology from outside the University nominated by the Chancellor, Commissioner, College Education or his nominee not below the rank of Deputy Secretary and two teachers nominated by the Vice-Chancellor.
6. The facts leading to the controversy involved in the present writ petition are that one Shri Shyam Singh Ratnu, Sub Inspector, Police, ATS Chowki, Udaipur lodged a written report at CID Special Operation Group (SOG), Police Station, Jaipur, inter alia stating that the fake mark sheets/degrees are being issued by the petitioner University to the students JODHPUR NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, JODHPUR VS. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR. (S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.7628/15) 4 without their appearing in the examination. On the basis of the written report submitted as aforesaid, an FIR being No.15/14 was registered at CID (SOG), Police Station, Rajasthan, Jaipur and the investigation commenced. The Chancellor/Chairperson of the University Mr.Kamal Mehta was arrested by the police allegedly for providing fake mark sheets/degrees to the students without their attending classes and appearing in the examination. During the investigation, it was revealed that the petitioner University started operating off-campus study centres by appointing Coordinators within and outside the State of Rajasthan. On the basis of the information given by Mr. Kamal Mehta, the mark sheets, application forms, admit cards and other incriminating documents were recovered from his office. It was found that a sum of Rs.16.42 crores realised from the students towards the fees, were deposited in the bank account of the petitioner University. It was further revealed the Coordinators to operate the distant education was appointed by the Chairperson Mr. Kamal Mehta by issuing the appointment letter under the signature of Registrar of the University, Mr.Pradeep Kumar Dey. The Vice-Chancelllor of the University Mr. V.P.Gupta and Registrar Mr.P.K.Dey, in their written report clarified that no JODHPUR NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, JODHPUR VS. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR. (S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.7628/15) 5 authorisation letter has been issued by the University to Shri Kamal Mehta to appoint National Coordinators for distant education and no appointment letter under the signature of the Registrar has been issued appointing the Coordinators. The police found that the letters appointing the Coordinators were issued by Mr.Kamal Mehta under forged signatures of the Registrar of the University Mr.P.K.Dey. The Coordinators appointed by Mr.Kamal Mehta who were operating the different centres were also arrested. After completion of the investigation, the police has filed charge sheet against the Chancellor/Chairperson of the University Mr.Kamal Mehta, the Coordinators appointed by him and others, for commission of offences under Sections 420, 467, 468, 120 B IPC. The details of the mark sheets/degrees alleged to have been issued to the students admitted through different centres operated by National Coordinators appointed as aforesaid, as set out in the charge sheet, read as under: क० नम पथम द तय तत य वर प स आउट कल स० वर वर 1 नकत गप ऑफ इनट"ग#ट#ड लरनग 1273 1790 1787 4002 8852 2 यग क#र(य( फ उड#शन 1127 813 1065 642 3647 3 सय * वरड ऑफ इनट"ग#ट#ड 1237 1701 2535 2560 8033 सटड ज 4 एडम सट(स क#र(य( स/रय*शन 706 759 1416 1590 4471 प ० लल० 5 य/ग 4343 5063 6803 8794 25003 JODHPUR NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, JODHPUR VS. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR. (S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.7628/15) 6 7. After due consideration, the criminal court of competent jurisdiction has already framed charges inter alia against Mr. Kamal Mehta, the Chancellor/Chairperson of the petitioner University for commission of offences under Section 420, 467, 468 & 120 B IPC.
8. During the pendency of the investigation in the criminal case, taking into consideration the news published in daily newspaper 'Dainik Bhaskar' dated 26.12.14, the State Government constituted an Enquiry Committee consisting of Principal Secretary, Higher Education, Commissioner, Higher Education and Mr.Anoop Srivastav, Joint Director, College Education, to make an enquiry in relation thereto. Vide order dated 26.2.15, the State Government constituted yet another Enquiry Committee consisting of various officers, as under:
1. Professor Kailash Sodhani, Vice Chancellor, MDS University, Ajmer -Chairperson 2. Professor J.P.Singhal, Ex-Principal and Syndicate Member, University of Rajasthan - Member 3. Mr.Shrawan Sahni, IAS, Commissioner, College Education, Rajasthan. -Member Secretary 9. Later, vide order dated 15.4.15 issued by the Joint Secretary, Higher Education, Government of Rajasthan, Mr.Bhagwati Singh Rathore, Deputy Superintendent of Police, the Investigating Officer, was also inducted as Member of the JODHPUR NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, JODHPUR VS. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR. (S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.7628/15) 7 Committee and in continuation thereof, vide order dated 27.4.15, in place of Director, College Education, the Registrar, Sardar Patel University of Police, Security and Criminal Justice, Jodhpur was also nominated as Member of the Enquiry Committee.
10. In the meantime, the Additional Director General of Police, ATS & SOG, Rajasthan, Jaipur addressed the letter dated 1.4.15 to the Principal Secretary, Higher Education, Rajasthan, accompanied by the list of the students who were issued forged mark sheets/degrees by the petitioner University, with the request to forward the said list to Public Service Commission and other recruiting authorities.
11. Accordingly, vide communication dated 18.5.15, the Joint Secretary, Higher Education issued directions to the Commissioner, College Education for publication of list of students in the leading daily newspapers and on the websites to prevent the misuse of degrees/mark sheets. The petitioner University vide representation dated 2.6.15 addressed to the Minister for Higher Education, Government of Rajasthan, represented against the same.
12. At this stage, on the basis of the prima facie finding alleged to have been arrived at by the Enquiry Committee JODHPUR NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, JODHPUR VS. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR. (S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.7628/15) 8 constituted as aforesaid, regarding fake degrees being issued by the University, the State Government issued a notice dated 23.6.15 in exercise of the power conferred under Section 44 (1) of the Act to the Vice Chancellor/President of the petitioner University to show cause as to why in terms Section 44(6) of the Act for violation of the provisions of the Act, the University may not be liquidated and an Administrator be not appointed to administer the affairs of the University.
13. During the pendency of the proceedings initiated under Section 44 of the Act as aforesaid, on the basis of the recommendations of the Enquiry Committee, vide order dated 3.7.15 issued by the Principal Secretary, Higher Education, Government of Rajasthan, the admission of the students in the petitioner University during the academic session 2015-16 has been banned.
14. The petitioner University represented against the ban imposed, vide representation dated 7.7.15 seeking recalling/ modification/clarification in terms that the ban imposed does not apply on regular students to be admitted by the University during the academic session 2015-16, but to no avail. Hence, this petition.
15. Dr.P.S.Bhati, Additional Advocate General alongwith JODHPUR NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, JODHPUR VS. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR. (S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.7628/15) 9 Mr.S.S.Rathore, has put in appearance on behalf of the State.
16. In the first instance, an additional affidavit accompanied by the factual report setting out the facts relating to the fake degrees issued and the recommendations made by the Enquiry Committee on 26.3.15, was filed on behalf of the State. That apart, a communication dated 29.7.15 issued by the Joint Secretary, Higher Education addressed to the President/Vice Chancellor of the University, is also placed on record, whereby in response to the letter dated 13.7.15 sent by the Vice Chancellor/President of the petitioner University addressed to the Principal Secretary, Higher Education, Government of Rajasthan praying for recalling the order dated 3.7.15, certain informations were sought.
17. Now, a reply to the writ petition has been filed on behalf of the respondents taking the stand that off-campus centres and/or study centers were set up by the petitioner University without obtaining the permission from the State Government in defiance of the provisions of Section 38 of the Act. That apart, it is submitted that as per UGC (Establishment of and Maintenance of Standards in Private Universities) Regulations, 2003, the off-campus centres and study centres are permitted to be set up only with the prior approval of UGC and the State JODHPUR NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, JODHPUR VS. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR. (S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.7628/15) 10 Government but, no permission of the State Government was sought by the petitioner University for opening the centres or appointing Coordinators. The respondents have placed on record the factual report dated 6.8.15 received from SOG giving the details of the investigation and involvement of inter alia Mr. Kamal Mehta, the Chancellor/Chairperson of the University in commission of offences under Sections 420, 467, 468 & 120 B IPC. The minutes of the meeting of the Enquiry Committee held on 6.5.15 making recommendation for imposing ban on admission of the students in the petitioner University during the academic session 2015-16, is placed on record. That apart, an order dated 28.8.15 issued by the Joint Secretary, Higher Education reconstituting the Enquiry Committee and extending its term upto 30.9.15 is placed on record as Annexure R/4. Pursuant to the order dated 3.7.15 the communication dated 17.8.15 issued by the University Grant Commission, addressed to the Principal Secretary, Higher Education, informing about the decision taken by the UGC to issue a public notice on its website pursuant to order dated 3.7.15 issued by the State Government, is also placed on record by the respondents as Annexure R/6.
18. I have heard learned counsels appearing for the JODHPUR NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, JODHPUR VS. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR. (S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.7628/15) 11 parties.
19. Mr.S.P.Sharma, Senior Advocate, appearing for the petitioner University submitted that the order impugned dated 3.7.15 issued by the State Government is ex facie illegal and without jurisdiction. Learned counsel would submit that there is no provision under the Act, authorising the State Government to prohibit the petitioner University from admitting the students on any ground whatsoever. Learned counsel submitted that as per provisions of Section 44 of the Act, after conclusion of the enquiry, on receipt of the enquiry report, if the State Government arrives at the conclusion that the circumstances/conditions mentioned in Section 44 of the Act, stand established, it may make an order for liquidation of the University and appointment of Administrator, who as per the mandate of the provisions of sub-section (7) of Section 44 is required to administer the affairs of the University, until the last batch of the students of regular courses have completed their course and they have been awarded degrees, diplomas or awards, as the case may be. Learned counsel submitted that before taking the decision for liquidation of the University and appointment of Administrator, the action of the State Government in prohibiting the University from admitting the JODHPUR NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, JODHPUR VS. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR. (S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.7628/15) 12 students for pursuing regular courses in such a perfunctory manner without giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner-University, is not sustainable in the eyes of law. In support of the contention, learned counsel has relied upon a decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of “CMJ Foundation & Ors. vs. State of Meghalaya & Ors.”
., (Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No.19617/13, decided vide order dated 13.9.13). Drawing the attention of this court to the details of number of students studying in the petitioner University, as set out in para 18 of the writ petition, learned counsel submitted that the admission process for MDS courses already stands completed and when the admission process for admission to other courses was on, the action taken by the State Government during pendency of the proceedings under Section 44 of the Act, is absolutely unreasonable and amounts to colourable exercise of the power. Learned counsel submitted that as per provisions of Section 44, the State Government is under an obligation to issue notice requiring the University to show cause within 45 days as to why an order of its liquidation should not be made, however, the State Government without even forming the prima facie opinion to take the proceedings for liquidation of the JODHPUR NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, JODHPUR VS. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR. (S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.7628/15) 13 University in terms of sub-section (2) of Section 44, straight away, the petitioner University has been directed to show cause as to why the University may not be liquidated and Administrator be appointed to administer the affairs of the University. Learned counsel submitted that though the proceedings initiated under Section 44 is not impugned in the present writ petition, but the action in issuing the notice certainly reflects arbitrariness on the part of the authorities of the State Government in taking proceedings against the petitioner University. Learned counsel submitted that the petitioner University has already discontinued the off campus courses and therefore, the State Government had no occasion to ban the admission in professional courses, which are being regulated by the statutory bodies like UGC, AICTE, DCI and BCI etc. Learned counsel submitted that the charges against the Chancellor of the University regarding unauthorised degrees being issued, which are absolutely baseless, relate to off-campus courses and the role of the University for such external students being only supervisory, no liability can be attached to the authorities of the University for non observance of the procedure. Learned counsel submitted that the charge sheet filed does not reflect that 25003 mark JODHPUR NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, JODHPUR VS. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR. (S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.7628/15) 14 sheets/degrees are found to be fake and therefore, the enquiry initiated by the State Government merely on the basis of the media reports, is absolutely unwarranted and unjustified. Learned counsel would submit that even otherwise, the University has to be run for the students already pursuing their studies in different courses and therefore, no harm will be caused if the University is permitted to conduct the regular courses of studies during the academic session 2015-16 by admitting the fresh students. Learned counsel submitted that in the professional courses, the admission process has to be completed within the time frame as directed by the respective regulatory bodies and therefore, if the order impugned is allowed to stand, the petitioner University shall be precluded from admitting the students and thus, it will cause irreparable loss. Learned counsel submitted that the order impugned recites that on the basis of the prima facie findings recorded by the Enquiry Committee, it is decided to ban the admission of the students in the petitioner University during the academic session 2015- 16, however, interim enquiry report, if any, submitted by the Enquiry Committee is not placed on record. Learned counsel submitted that in the factual report submitted alongwith the JODHPUR NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, JODHPUR VS. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR. (S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.7628/15) 15 affidavit filed on behalf of the State, it is stated that the Enquiry committee vide its report dated 26.3.15 has made recommendations, which includes the recommendation for banning the admission of the students in the petitioner University during the academic session 2015-16, however, despite directions issued by this court vide order dated 28.8.15, no such report, if any, has been placed on record by the State Government and therefore, the adverse inference deserves to be drawn that no such enquiry report exists and the order impugned has been passed by the State Government without application of mind, on the basis of non existing facts. In support of the contention, learned counsel has relied upon a decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of “State of Bihar vs. Kumar Promod Narain Singh”., 1997(5) SCC, 298. Learned counsel submitted that now the State has extended the term of the Enquiry Committee upto 30.9.15 and thus, by the time the enquiry is completed, the admission process in professional courses conducted will be over and thus, the position will become irreversible to the detriment of the petitioner University.
20. On the other hand, Dr. P.S.Bhati, Additional Advocate General, submitted that the functions of the petitioner JODHPUR NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, JODHPUR VS. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR. (S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.7628/15) 16 University, a statutory body, are regulated by the provisions of the Act enacted by State Legislature. Learned AAG drawing the attention of the court to Section 2(r) of the Act, submitted that the State Government is included within the definition of 'regulating body' and therefore, as per the provisions of Section 38, the petitioner University is bound to comply with the directions issued by the State Government. Learned AAG submitted that as per Section 41, for the purpose of ascertaining the standards of teaching, examination and research or any other matter relating to the University, the State Government may cause an inspection to be made in such manner as may be prescribed, by such person or persons as it may think fit, and the University is under an obligation to adopt such corrective measure and make efforts so as to ensure the compliance of recommendations made by the State Government. Learned AAG submitted that if the University fails to comply with the recommendations made, the State Government may give such directions as it may deem fit for such compliance. Learned AAG submitted that by virtue of provisions of Section 42, the State Government is empowered to call for information from the University relating to its working, functions, achievements, standard of teaching, JODHPUR NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, JODHPUR VS. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR. (S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.7628/15) 17 examination and research or any other matters as it may consider necessary to judge the efficiency of the University in such form and within such time as may be prescribed by rules and the University is bound to furnish the information as required by the State Government under sub-section (1) within the prescribed time. Learned AAG would submit that under Section 44, the State Government is vested with the power to take proceedings for liquidation of the University, if it appears to be State Government that the University has contravened any of the provisions of the Act or the Rules, Statutes or Ordinances made thereunder or has violated any of the directions issued by it under this Act or has ceased to carry out any undertaking given by it to the State Government or a situation of financial mis-management or mal-administration has arisen in University. Learned AAG would submit that the State Government being responsible for maintaining standards of education in the State, is under an obligation to take appropriate action, on mal-practices adopted by an University coming to its notice. Learned AAG submitted that the Chancellor/ Chairperson of the University, who is head of the Institution, is found indulged in issuing fake mark-sheets/ degrees to the students without JODHPUR NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, JODHPUR VS. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR. (S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.7628/15) 18 undertaking studies and examination, is a serious matter and the University which has started the off-campus education centres cannot be permitted to contend that it has no supervision or control over the students studying in such coordinating study centres. Learned AAG submitted that after investigation, it stands established that the off-campus centres were being operated and the fake mark-sheets/ degrees were being issued under direct and effective control of the Chancellor of the University and thus, if a Chancellor of the University, who is also Founder of the Trust, which is sponsoring body of the University, is found indulged in commission of the criminal offence, then taking into consideration the totality of the facts and circumstances pursuant to the recommendations made by the Enquiry Committee constituted by the State Government, the action taken banning the admission of the students in the petitioner University during the academic session 2015-16 cannot be faulted with. Learned AAG would submit that the State Government being a regulatory body and responsible for maintaining the standards of education in the State inheres the power to even ban the admission of the students in any educational institution operating in the State which is found to JODHPUR NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, JODHPUR VS. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR. (S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.7628/15) 19 be indulged in mal-practices and fails to maintain the standard of education. Learned AAG submitted that affairs of the University are under direct and effective control of the Sponsoring Body and the Chancellor and the Sponsoring Body i.e. the Kushal Education Trust, which is though, registered under the Rajasthan Public Trust Act, is for all intent and purposes is functioning as family trust. Learned AAG submitted that before starting the off-campus centres within the State and outside the State, the petitioner University was under an obligation to obtain prior approval of the UGC and the State Government, but no such approval was even applied for. Drawing the attention of the Court to Clause 3.3.1 of the UGC (Establishment and Maintenance of Standards in Private Universities) Regulations, 2003, learned AAG submitted that the off-campus centres or study centres could only be set up by the University with the prior approval of the UGC as also the State Government. Learned AAG relying upon the report of the SOG and the charge-sheet filed inter-alia against Mr. Kamal Mehta, Chancellor/ Chairperson of the University, submitted that the allegations against the Chancellor/Chairperson of the University found proved speaks a volume about the overall functioning of the University. JODHPUR NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, JODHPUR VS. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR. (S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.7628/15) 20 Learned AAG submitted that the petitioner University is found prima facie guilty of issuing 25003 forged mark sheets/degrees and therefore, the action taken by the State Government banning admission of the students in the petitioner University during the academic session 2015-16 taking into consideration the larger public interest, even during the pendency of the enquiry, is absolutely justified and does not warrant any interference by this court in exercise of its extra ordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Learned AAG submitted that it was only a typographical error that in the factual report annexed with the affidavit filed on behalf of the State, the date of the Committee's report was mentioned as dated 26th March, 2015. Learned AAG submitted that as a matter of fact, that refers to the minutes of the Enquiry Committee held on 6.5.2015 making recommendations inter-alia for banning the admission of the students in the petitioner University during the Academic Session 2015-16. Learned AAG submitted that the petitioner University has already made a representation dated 13.7.15, for recalling the order dated 3.7.15 and in response thereto, certain informations were sought by the State Government vide communication dated 29.7.15, which has JODHPUR NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, JODHPUR VS. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR. (S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.7628/15) 21 not been responded to by the petitioner University and thus, the representation made remains pending consideration till this date.
21. Replying the arguments of the learned AAG, Mr. Sanjeev Prakash Sharma, Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioner University, submitted that the charges against the Chancellor of the University are essentially with regard to the undergraduate and postgraduate courses conducted through off-campus centres and there is absolutely no allegation against the petitioner University in respect of the professional degrees awarded. Learned counsel would submit that the off- campus education centres having been closed down by the University, there is no justification for not permitting the University to conduct the professional courses, which are being conducted under the direct supervision and control of the regulatory bodies. Learned counsel submitted that the minutes of the Enquiry Committee making recommendations for banning the admission, unless taken to be a report under Section 44 (3) of the Act cannot be relied upon by the State Government. Learned counsel submitted that admittedly, the order impugned has been issued without giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner University and therefore, the same JODHPUR NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, JODHPUR VS. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR. (S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.7628/15) 22 deserves to be quashed for this reason alone. Learned counsel would submit that even the factual report submitted by the SOG cannot be made basis for putting ban on admission to the professional courses conducted by the University. Learned counsel submitted that the charges levelled against the Chancellor of the University are yet to be proved and therefore, at this stage, the State Government has no authority to put ban on the admission altogether which would virtually lead to closure of the University.
22. I have considered the rival submissions and perused the material on record.
23. Before proceeding to consider the rival submissions of the parties, it would be appropriate to refer to the various provisions of the Act, which deals with the appointment of Chancellor, its function and powers as also the role of the Sponsoring Body in administering the affairs of the University.
24. As per the provisions of Section 12 of the Act, the Chancellor shall be appointed by the Sponsoring Body with the consent of the State Government for a period of five years from the date on which he enters upon his office. The Chancellor, who is head of the University by virtue of his office, is empowered to appoint the Vice-Chancelllor, remove JODHPUR NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, JODHPUR VS. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR. (S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.7628/15) 23 the Vice-Chancellor, appoint the Registrar, to call for any information or record in connection with the affairs of the University and to exercise such other powers as may be prescribed by the Statutes.
25. In exercise of the powers conferred under sub-section (3) and (4) of Section 29 of the Act, with the approval of the Government of Rajasthan, the University has framed the Statutes. As per Statute 13, the Chairperson of the University, (which as informed is the new nomenclature adopted for Chancellor), shall perform the duties in honorary capacity, however, may be paid such honorarium not less than salary of the President. Statute 13(3) empowers the Chairperson to exercise all such power and functions as may inhere in him or her by virtue of his/her being the head of the University and further such other powers and functions as may be assigned to him from time to time. By virtue of clause (4) of Statute 13, when any exigency arises and the Chairperson is of the opinion that it is not possible or convenient, under the circumstances, to convene a meeting of the Board of Management at short notice, he/she may take appropriate decision or action as may deem fit and necessary in the best interest of the University. Further, as per clause (5) of Statute JODHPUR NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, JODHPUR VS. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR. (S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.7628/15) 24 13, in pursuance of any decisions or actions specified in clause (4) of Statute 13 or for the purposes of immediate implementation thereof, the Chairperson shall have power to issue any directions or instructions to all or any of the Authorities, Officers, teachers, other academic staffs, other employees, ministerial staff and/or students of the University and they shall be bound to comply with such order or instructions forthwith. The Chairperson may amend or revoke any order or instructions issued by him provided that such amendment or revocation of order shall not affect the continuance of proceedings. However, by virtue of clause (6) of Statute 13, Chairperson shall as soon as practicable, convene an emergency meeting of the Board of Management and submit a detailed report on situation under clause (4).
26. As noticed hereinabove, the Chancellor/Chairperson of the University, is appointed by the Sponsoring Body with the consent of the State Government and the Sponsoring Body of the University i.e. the Kushal Education Trust, as per the Trust Deed Corrigendum placed on record by the respondents under the directions of this court, is operated by Board of Trustees, consisting of two members namely; Shri Kamal Mehta, Founder and Smt. Sarita Mehta, wife of Shri Kamal Mehta, JODHPUR NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, JODHPUR VS. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR. (S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.7628/15) 25 Trustee. Mr. Kamal Mehta is presently Chancellor/Chairperson of the University as well.
27. Thus, undoubtedly, the Chancellor/Chairperson of the University and the Sponsoring Body have deep & pervasive control over the affairs of the University.
28. Obviously, the decision was taken by the State to permit the Sponsoring body, Kushal Education Trust, engaged in field of education for last several years to run the University with an intention that it would contribute in the academic development of the people of the State, while maintaining the ethical standards of higher education. Even otherwise, Kushal Education Trust, a public trust, which has been created inter alia for the pious purpose of alleviation of human sufferings eradication of illiteracy and the imparting of sound education with opportunities for research, is expected to act in furtherance of the objects sought to be achieved. It is really unfortunate that the person, who is at the helm of affairs of the Sponsoring Body as also the University promoted by it, is found to have indulged in selling the degrees to the students, who have never attended the classes and appeared in the examination, in exchange for money. In this view of the matter, such an act of attacking the sanctity of an ethical JODHPUR NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, JODHPUR VS. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR. (S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.7628/15) 26 social system and adversely affecting the standard of education in the State must be a matter of serious concern for the State authorities and other regulatory bodies. Thus, the endeavour of the welfare State to deal with such unscrupulous persons and the educational institutions sternly, is the need of the hours.
29. The petitioner University constituted and established under an Act enacted by the State Legislature, is under an obligation to function as a responsible institution in furtherance of objects sought to be achieved and its function being controlled & regulated by the provision of the Act, no individual officer of the University including Chancellor inheres the authority to act in such a manner, assuming itself to be the sole repository of powers, which are required to be exercised by the University as an institution in the manner prescribed under the Act. It is really strange that the University has attempted to project before this court, as if the Chancellor/Chairperson of the University is a different entity and the University as an institution owes no responsibility regarding his unscrupulous acts performed by him in the capacity of Chancellor/Chairperson of the University. In the considered opinion of this court, if the University fails to act in JODHPUR NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, JODHPUR VS. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR. (S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.7628/15) 27 furtherance of the objects sought to be achieved and indulge in mal-functioning to such an extent that its Chancellor/Chairperson is found involved in issuing fake degrees to the students through a planned device, in exchange for money, under the Scheme of the Act, powers of the State Government to take appropriate measures with utmost expedition, to avoid risk to the future of new comer students, cannot be doubted.
30. It is pertinent to note that as per provisions of Section 2(o) of the Act, 'off-campus centre' is the centre to be established by the University outside the main campus operated and maintained as its constituent unit having University's complement of facilities, faculty and staff. Likewise, as per provisions of Section 2(s) of the Act, the 'study centre' is the centre to be established and maintained or recognized by the University for the purpose of advising, counselling or for rendering any other assistance required by the students in the context of the distant education. Suffice it to say that as per mandate of the provisions of the Act, the off-campus centre or the study centre to be established by the University shall function under the direct and effective control of the University and does not have any independent identity JODHPUR NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, JODHPUR VS. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR. (S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.7628/15) 28 as such. It is astounding that the petitioner University would suggest before this court that the supervision and control on the students undertaking studies at the off-campus/study centre, was entrusted to the Coordinators and the University was only issuing the degrees on the basis of the data and material provided by such centre. In any case, the petitioner University, which is directly responsible for maintaining the standard of education imparted at its various centres within the campus and off-campus cannot be permitted to plead ignorance regarding mal-functioning and mal-administration prevailing therein.
31. As discussed hereinabove, the allegations prima facie found proved against the Chancellor/Chairperson of the University and his involvement in commission of criminal offences for which he is being tried by the court of competent jurisdiction, speaks a volume about mal-functioning and mal- administration of the University and therefore, the State Government, a regulatory body, responsible for maintaining the standard of education in the State, cannot remain a silent spectator. This court is firmly of the opinion that the State Government as a regulatory body, taking into consideration larger public interest, is entitled to take appropriate interim JODHPUR NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, JODHPUR VS. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR. (S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.7628/15) 29 measures during the pendency of the enquiry and/or the proceedings initiated for the liquidation of the University and therefore, the stand sought to be taken by the petitioner University that the State Government has no power whatsoever to inter meddle in the matter of admission of the students, cannot be accepted.
32. Indisputably, the order impugned has been passed by the State Government without extending an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner University but then, the petitioner University has already approached the State Government by way of representations seeking review/recalling the order dated 3.7.15 and in response thereto, certain informations were requisitioned by the authority concerned. It is a common ground between the parties that the representation made by the petitioner University in this regard is pending consideration before the State Government and therefore, the interest of justice will be served in directing the State Government to consider and decide the representation made by the petitioner University for recalling the ban imposed vide order dated 3.7.15 expeditiously, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner University.
33. In view of the conclusions arrived at as aforesaid, other JODHPUR NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, JODHPUR VS. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR. (S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.7628/15) 30 contentions raised on behalf of the petitioner University questioning the legality of order dated 3.7.15 are not required to be dealt with by this court, at this stage.
34. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with the directions to the State Government to consider and decide the representation made by the petitioner University for recalling the order dated 3.7.15 expeditiously, in any case, within a period of a week from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order, by passing a speaking order, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner University. Needless to say that if aggrieved by the order to be passed by the State Government pursuant to directions issued as aforesaid, the petitioner University shall be at liberty to avail the appropriate remedy available under the law. No order as to costs. (SANGEET LODHA),J.
Aditya/