Manikgarh Cement Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors. - Court Judgment

Excerpt:
- section 10: [swatanter kumar, c.j., a.p. deshpande & smt. nishita mhatre, jj] admission to professional colleges - technical courses - publication of brochure on basis of which candidates seek admission to various institution keeping in mind their merit and preference of colleges held, for ensuring adherence to proper appreciation of an academic course, it is essential that the method of admission is just, fair and transparent. the first step in this direction would be publication of a brochure on the basis of which the applicants are supposed to aspire for admission to various institution keeping in mind their merit and preference of college. brochure, firstly has to be in conformity with law and the statutory scheme notified by the competent authority. it is a complete and composite document as it deals with the scheme for conducting their entrance examinations, declaration of results, general instructions and method of admission, etc. this brochure is binding on the applicants as well as the authorities. this brochure or admission notification issued by the state or other competent authority cannot be altered at a subsequent stage particularly once the process of admission has begun. there is hardly any exception to this accepted rule of law. section 10: [swatanter kumar, c.j., a.p. deshpande & smt. nishita mhatre,jj] admission to professional colleges - technical courses - approval to additional seats or to start new course - cut off dates held, the settled principle of law is that merit of the applicant is the primary criteria which would determine his rank as well as the college where he would be entitled to admission. this rule should not be frustrated as it will tantamount to entirely upsetting the object of admissions based on merit oriented method and would cast cloud on the fairness and transparency of the method of admission. one of the ways in which merit can be defeated is allowing increase in the intake strength or commencement if new colleges beyond cut-off date and admissions beyond the last date specified in the notification/calendar issued by the concerned authorities. this can be illustrated by giving an example. college a which is running a professional course like engineering or mba etc. has an intake capacity of 60 seats which has duly been notified in the information brochure. however, after the cut-off date, approval is granted by the aicte and thereafter, the process is taken up by the state and the intake capacity of the college is increased by 30 more seats. these seats would obviously, not be notified in the information brochure and the candidate who are meritorious and for whom college a; be the college of reference could not get seats or give preference as the seats were limited. none had the proper knowledge about the increase in intake of seats though at a much subsequent stage and may be even after the last date of admission is over either by themselves or under the order of the court even it is put on the internet or given in the newspaper, the candidates of higher rank or meritorious candidates would not be able to avail of that benefit because they have already submitted the testimonial, have paid their fees and the courses have commenced. in that situation, for variety of reasons, they may not be able to take admission in the institution of their higher preference while the candidates of much lower merit will be admitted to that course. besides defeating the merit, it has been commonly noticed that the late admissions made by the colleges directly effect notified candidates who have questioned it more than often as their admission process is not so just, fair and transparent which has given rise to the litigation. it is also a kind of back door entry method. another serious consequence that result from such admissions is shortening of the academic courses in an undesirable manner. it is expected of other candidate selected to a professional course that he or she would complete the course in its entirety and not by missing more than a month or so in joining the said course. this results in lowering the excellence of education as well as harms the academic standard of professional education. admission to professional colleges: [swatanter kumar, c.j., a.p. deshpande & smt. nishita mhatre, jj] technical courses - held, in process of admission to professional colleges relating to technical courses, primarily three institutional bodies are involved. (i) all india technical council for technical education, (ii) state of maharashtra through director of technical education and (iii) university to which such institution is affiliated the role of all these institutions in distinct and different but for a common object. primary of the rule of all india council for technical education (aicte) is now well settled but that certainly does not mean that role of the state government and for that matter the university is without any purpose or of no importance. the council is the authority constituted under the central act with the responsibility of maintaining education standards and judging upon the infra-structure and facilities available for imparting such professional education. its opinion is of utmost importance and shall take precedence over views of the state as well as that of the university. the concerned department of the state and the affiliating university has a role to pay but it is limited in its application. they cannot lay down any guidelines or policies which would be in conflict with the central statute or the students laid down a by the central body. state can frame its policy for admission to such professional courses but such policy again has to be in conformity with the directives issued by the central body. while the state grants its approval and university its affiliation for increased intake of seats or commencement for a new course/college, its directions should not offend and be repugnant to what has been laid down in the condition of approval granted by the central authority or council. what is most important is that all these authorities have to work ad idem as they all have a common object to achieve i.e. of proper imparting of education an ensuring maintenance of proper standards of education, examination and ensuring proper infrastructure for betterment of educational system. only if all these authorities work in a co-ordinated manner and with co-operation they would be able to achieve the very object for which all these entities exist admission to professional courses: [swatanter kumar, c.j.,a.p. deshpande & smt. nishita mhatre, jj] admission schedule - interference by courts held, all the expert bodies viz. aicte as well as directorate of education in consultation with the departments of the state regulating the process of admission and maintenance of standards of education had notified a legal binding document specifying dates and schedule for various matters in relation to admission of students and commencement of courses. there has to be so compelling circumstances and grounds before the court to interfere with the prescribed schedule. it is neither so arbitrary nor so perverse, keeping in view the essential features relating to imparting education to professional courses that it should invite judicial chastisement to the extent of laying down entirely new schedule. merely because there has been some delay on the part of either of these authorities to timely grant of either of these authorities to timely grant or decline approval and permission to commence a course per se would not be sufficient ground for disturbing the notified schedule and timely commencement of courses. - in the order dated 30-12-1985 as well as in the subsequent order impugned in this petition, there was no reference made whatsoever to the market rate hence the assessment is arbitrary.r.s. mohite, j.1. heard shri manohar, advocate for the petitionerand shri sonare, agp for the respondents. 2. the present writ petition impugns and seeks to quash the orders dated 30-12-1985 passed by the sub-divisional officer, rajura, in revenue case no. 6/nap-34/84-85 and further order dated 23-10-1986 passed by the resident deputy collector, chandrapur in revenue appeal no. 67/nap-34/85-86 and the order dated 29-11-1988 passed by the additional commissioner, nagpur division, nagpur, in appeal no.nap/34/gadchandur-5/ 1986-87. 3. the brief facts of the case are as follows : (a) the petitioner company is in the business of manufacture of cement. it has lands situated in village gadchandur, ta. rajura, district - chandrapur. (b) on 4-2-1985, the sub-divisional officer, rajura, issued an order under section 110 of the maharashtra land revenue code, fixing the non-agricultural assessment in respect of lands owned by the company at rs. 0.75 paise per square metre for industrial land and 0.50 paise per square meter for residential land. (c) on 30-12-1985, the same sub-divisional officer, purporting to review his earlier order in view of the audit objection raised by the government auditor, fixed the fresh non-agricultural assessment at one paise per square meter in respect of both categories of land. (d) on 23-10-1986 an appeal filed by the petitioner company under section 247 of the maharashtra land revenue code came to be rejected by the resident deputy collector, chandrapur. (e) on 6-8-1987, the village gadchandur was categorised as an urban area and the said categorisation was notified in the maharashtra government gazette dated 5-5-1988. (f) on 29-11-1988, the second appeal under maharashtra land revenue code filed by the petitioner company came to be dismissed by the additional commissioner, nagpur division, nagpur. however, while dismissing the appeal, notwithstanding the fact that no appeal has been filed by the government, he doubled the rate of non-agricultural assessment and fixed the same at two paise per square meter in respect of both categories of lands. (g) on 2-1-1989, the present writ petition has been filed impugning the aforesaid judgments as stated hereinabove. 4. the brief contentions of the petitioner can be summarized as follows : (i) that, under section 110(2) of the act, the non-agricultural assessment is required to be fixed on the basis of the market rate. in the order dated 30-12-1985 as well as in the subsequent order impugned in this petition, there was no reference made whatsoever to the market rate hence the assessment is arbitrary. (ii) that in any case, the commissioner could not have doubled the non-agricultural assessment rate at two paise per square metre because there was no appeal filed by the government for enhancement of the rate of the non-agricultural assessment. that in any case, rate was enhanced to two paise per square meter not on the basis of actual market value, as required by section 110(2) of the code but was based on an untenable assumption that because the land was declared to be an urban area in 1987, the infrastructural development of the land in the year 1984 could not have been much different. 5. on behalf of the respondents, the learned assistant government pleader sought to counter these arguments by stating that with effect from 5-5-1988, gadchandur village had been notified to be an urban area and that the standard rate of non-agricultural assessment had been fixed @ six paise per square meter with effect from this date. it was his contention that if the rate was six paise per square metre in the year 1988, the rate of two paise per square metre fixed by the additional commissioner prior to 5-5-1988, could not be said to be arbitrary. 6. i have heard both parties. we are concerned with the fixation of non-agricultural assessment under section 110 of the maharashtra land revenue code, till 5-5-1988 i.e. the date on which the land was notified to be an urban area. there is no dispute that from 5-5-1988, the land will have to be assessed on the basis of urban area in accordance with section 114 of the code. so far as the period prior upto 5-5-1988 is concerned, the assessment would have to be on the footing that the area was non urban area and on the basis of principles contained in section 110 of the maharashtra land revenue code. the only criteria prescribed by section 110 for fixation of non-agricultural assessment is the market value. i find that in none of the impugned orders, there is any attempt to discuss the market value of the land in question. the fixation made by the sub-divisional officer, rajura, was completely arbitrary. the resident deputy collector, chandrapur, in his order dated 23-10-1986 has proceeded to increase the non-agricultural assessment on erroneous footing that the non-agricultural assessment cannot be a fraction of one paise. he has arrived at this conclusion by completely ignoring the fact that section 110 of the code provides a minimum standard which could obviously be less than one paise or two paise as provided in section 110 of the code. the additional commissioner has proceeded on a completely different footing. in an second appeal filed by the petitioner, the non-agricultural assessment has been increased from one paise per square metre to two paise per square metre on the footing that the land had been declared as urban area in 1988 and, therefore, according to him, the position of infrastructure as regards this land could not have been much different in 1984. this argument was based on surmises and not on facts. he has also not given any finding as what could have been the market value of the land. 7. in the circumstances, i am inclined to allow this writ petition and remand the matter back to the sub divisional officer, rajura, with a direction to redetermine the non-agricultural assessment from the date of conversion of land into non-agricultural till 5-5-1988, after making enquiry as regards the market value of the land obtaining during the relevant years and basing the assessment on such market value. it is clarified that the sub-divisional officer will be at liberty to pass an order relating to adjustment of the amounts already paid, if he finds it necessary to do so. 8. in the result, rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms. in the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs.