Madhya Pradesh High Court
New Era College Of Management Through … vs Rajiv Gandhi Prodyogiki … on 24 June, 2025
Author: Vijay Kumar Shukla
Bench: Vijay Kumar Shukla, Prem Narayan Singh
1 WP-17701-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA
&
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PREM NARAYAN SINGH
ON THE 24th OF JUNE, 2025
WRIT PETITION No. 17681 of 2024
SARDAR VALLABH BHAI PATEL MAHAVIDHYALAYA THROUGH
SECRETARY OF THE SOCIETY SHASHANK NAGAR
Versus
RAJIV GANDHI PROUDYOGIKI VISHWAVIDYALAYA (STATE
TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY OF MADHYA PRADESH) AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Veer Kumar Jain - Sr. Advocate with Shri Vaibhav Jain - Advocate for
the petitioner.
Shri Manoj Kumar Dwivedi - Advocate through VC and Shri Vikas Jaiswal -
Advocate for the respondent No.1.
Shri Shrey Raj Saxena - Dy.AG for respondent No.2.
WITH
CONTEMPT PETITION CIVIL No. 4017 of 2024
SARDAR PATEL MAHAVIDYALAYA THROUGH PRESIDENT DR.
DHRUVA BHALLA
Versus
SHRI MOHAN SEN AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Veer Kumar Jain - Sr. Advocate with Shri Vaibhav Jain - Advocate
for the petitioner.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: VARGHESE
MATHEW
Signing time: 24-06-2025
14:48:22
2 WP-17701-2024
WRIT PETITION No. 17701 of 2024
NEW ERA COLLEGE OF MANAGEMENT THROUGH PRESIDENT OF
THE SOCIETY SHASHANK NAGAR
Versus
RAJIV GANDHI PRODYOGIKI VISHWAVIDYALAYA (STATE
TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY OF MADHYA PRADESH) AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Veer Kumar Jain - Sr. Advocate with Shri Vaibhav Jain - Advocate
for the petitioner.
Shri Manoj Kumar Dwivedi - Advocate through VC and Shri Vikas
Jaiswal - Advocate for the respondent No.1.
Shri Shrey Raj Saxena - Dy.AG for respondent No.2.
WRIT PETITION No. 17710 of 2024
LSA COLLEGE DHAR RUN BY SHRI HARIRAI JI SHIKSHAN SAMITI
THROUGH SECRETARY OF THE SAMITI RAJA ANIRUDH
Versus
RAJIV GANDHI PROUDYOGIKI VISHWAVIDYALAYA AND
OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Veer Kumar Jain - Sr. Advocate with Shri Vaibhav Jain - Advocate
for the petitioner.
Shri Manoj Kumar Dwivedi - Advocate through VC and Shri Vikas
Jaiswal - Advocate for the respondent No.1.
Shri Shrey Raj Saxena - Dy.AG for respondent No.2.
WRIT PETITION No. 17716 of 2024
DHAR COLLEGE DHAR RUN BY SAMRADDHI SHIKSHA VIKAS
EVAM SWASTHA SEWA SAMITI THROUGH PRESIDENT OF THE S
Versus
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: VARGHESE
MATHEW
Signing time: 24-06-2025
14:48:22
3 WP-17701-2024
RAJIV GANDHI PROUDYOGIKI VISHWAVIDYALAYA (STATE
TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY OF MADHYA PRADESH) AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Veer Kumar Jain - Sr. Advocate with Shri Vaibhav Jain - Advocate
for the petitioner.
Shri Manoj Kumar Dwivedi - Advocate through VC and Shri Vikas
Jaiswal - Advocate for the respondent No.1.
Shri Shrey Raj Saxena - Dy.AG for respondent No.2.
WRIT PETITION No. 17727 of 2024
INDORE INTERNATIONAL COLLEGE DHAR RUN BY SHREENATH
SHIKSHA SAMITI THROUGH SECRETARY OF THE SAMILI AB
Versus
RAJIV GANDHI PROUDYOGIKI VISHWAVIDYALAYA AND
OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Veer Kumar Jain - Sr. Advocate with Shri Vaibhav Jain - Advocate
for the petitioner.
Shri Manoj Kumar Dwivedi - Advocate through VC and Shri Vikas
Jaiswal - Advocate for the respondent No.1.
Shri Shrey Raj Saxena - Dy.AG for respondent No.2.
WRIT PETITION No. 17731 of 2024
ASPIRE INSTITUTE RUN BY ASPIRE WELFARE ACADEMIC
RESEARCH DEVELOPMENT SOCIETY THROUGH CHAIRMAN OF
THE
Versus
RAJIV GANDHI PROUDYOGIKI VISHWAVIDYALAYA (STATE
TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY OF MADHYA PRADESH) AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: VARGHESE
MATHEW
Signing time: 24-06-2025
14:48:22
4 WP-17701-2024
Shri Veer Kumar Jain - Sr. Advocate with Shri Vaibhav Jain - Advocate
for the petitioner.
Shri Manoj Kumar Dwivedi - Advocate through VC and Shri Vikas
Jaiswal - Advocate for the respondent No.1.
Shri Shrey Raj Saxena - Dy.AG for respondent No.2.
WRIT PETITION No. 17737 of 2024
SHRI JAIN DIWAKAR MAHAVIDYALAYA RUB NY SHRI JAIN
DIWAKAR VIDHYA PRACHARNI SAMITI THROUGH CHAIRMAN
OF
Versus
RAJIV GANDHI PROUDYOGIKI VISHWAVIDYALAYA AND
OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Veer Kumar Jain - Sr. Advocate with Shri Vaibhav Jain - Advocate
for the petitioner.
Shri Manoj Kumar Dwivedi - Advocate through VC and Shri Vikas
Jaiswal - Advocate for the respondent No.1.
Shri Shrey Raj Saxena - Dy.AG for respondent No.2.
WRIT PETITION No. 17938 of 2024
ASIAN INSTITUTE OF PROFESSIONAL STUDIES RUN BY
UTKRISHTHA SHIKSHA SAMITI INDORE THROUGH SECRETARY
OF
Versus
RAJIV GANDHI PROUDYOGIKI VISHWAVIDYALAYA (STATE
TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY OF MADHYA PRADESH) AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Veer Kumar Jain - Sr. Advocate with Shri Vaibhav Jain - Advocate
for the petitioner.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: VARGHESE
MATHEW
Signing time: 24-06-2025
14:48:22
5 WP-17701-2024
Shri Manoj Kumar Dwivedi - Advocate through VC and Shri Vikas
Jaiswal - Advocate for the respondent No.1.
Shri Shrey Raj Saxena - Dy.AG for respondent No.2.
WRIT PETITION No. 18187 of 2024
SHRI RAVINDRANATH TAGORE INSTITURE OF PROFESSIONAL
STUDIES RUN BY SANAWAD MANAS SHIKSHA SAMITI SANAW
Versus
RAJIV GANDHI PROUDYOGIKI VISHWAVIDYALAYA (STATE
TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY OF MADHYA PRADESH) AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Veer Kumar Jain - Sr. Advocate with Shri Vaibhav Jain - Advocate
for the petitioner.
Shri Manoj Kumar Dwivedi - Advocate through VC and Shri Vikas
Jaiswal - Advocate for the respondent No.1.
Shri Shrey Raj Saxena - Dy.AG for respondent No.2.
WRIT PETITION No. 18188 of 2024
SAI INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT RUN BY MAA PADMAWATI
EDUCATION SOCIAL WELFARE SOCIEITY THROUGH DR SHEETL
Versus
RAJIV GHANDI PROUDYOGIKI VISHWAVIDHYALAYA AND
OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Veer Kumar Jain - Sr. Advocate with Shri Vaibhav Jain - Advocate
for the petitioner.
Shri Manoj Kumar Dwivedi - Advocate through VC and Shri Vikas
Jaiswal - Advocate for the respondent No.1.
Shri Shrey Raj Saxena - Dy.AG for respondent No.2.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: VARGHESE
MATHEW
Signing time: 24-06-2025
14:48:22
6 WP-17701-2024
WRIT PETITION No. 18196 of 2024
SHRI GYAN SHIKSHA MAHAVIDHYALAYA RUN BY SHRI OM
SHANTI EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY THROUGH NEERAJ SINGH S/O
Versus
RAJIV GANDHI PROUDYOGIKI VISHWAVIDHYALAYA AND
OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Veer Kumar Jain - Sr. Advocate with Shri Vaibhav Jain - Advocate
for the petitioner.
Shri Manoj Kumar Dwivedi - Advocate through VC and Shri Vikas
Jaiswal - Advocate for the respondent No.1.
Shri Shrey Raj Saxena - Dy.AG for respondent No.2.
WRIT PETITION No. 19177 of 2024
LNCT BHOPAL INDORE CAMPUS INDORE THROUGH ITS
PRINCIPAL
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Kaivalya Ratnaparkhe - Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri Shrey Raj Saxena - Dy.AG for respondent No.1.
Shri Manoj Kumar Dwivedi - Advocate through VC and Shri Vikas
Jaiswal - Advocate for the respondent No.3.
Shri Ajinkya Dagaonkar - Advocate for respondent No.2 and 4.
WRIT PETITION No. 19321 of 2024
LITTLE ANGEL INSTITUTE OF PROFESSIONAL STUDIES THROUGH
ITS PRINCIPAL
Versus
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: VARGHESE
MATHEW
Signing time: 24-06-2025
14:48:22
7 WP-17701-2024
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Kaivalya Ratnaparkhe - Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri Shrey Raj Saxena - Dy.AG for respondent No.1.
Shri Manoj Kumar Dwivedi - Advocate through VC and Shri Vikas
Jaiswal - Advocate for the respondent No.3.
Shri Ajinkya Dagaonkar - Advocate for respondent No.2 and 4.
WRIT PETITION No. 21738 of 2024
SARDAR PATEL MAHAVIDYALAYA RUN BY SARANGPUR
SHIKSHA PRASARAK SAMITI SARAGPUR THROUGH PRESIDENT
DR. D
Versus
RAJIV GANDHI PROUDYOGIKI VISHWAVIDYALAYA (STATE
TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY OF MADHYA PRADESH) AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Veer Kumar Jain - Sr. Advocate with Shri Vaibhav Jain - Advocate
for the petitioner.
Shri Manoj Kumar Dwivedi - Advocate through VC and Shri Vikas
Jaiswal - Advocate for the respondent No.1.
Shri Shrey Raj Saxena - Dy.AG for respondent No.2.
WRIT PETITION No. 21740 of 2024
OXFORD INTERNATIONAL COLLEGE OF MANAGEMENT RUN BY
SHRI SHANTANU VIDHYAPEETH SOCIETY SAMITI THROUGH S
Versus
RAJIV GANDHI PROUDYOGIKI VISHWAVIDYALAYA (STATE
TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY OF MADHYA PRADESH) AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Veer Kumar Jain - Sr. Advocate with Shri Vaibhav Jain - Advocate
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: VARGHESE
MATHEW
Signing time: 24-06-2025
14:48:22
8 WP-17701-2024
for the petitioner.
Shri Manoj Kumar Dwivedi - Advocate through VC and Shri Vikas
Jaiswal - Advocate for the respondent No.1.
Shri Shrey Raj Saxena - Dy.AG for respondent No.2.
WRIT PETITION No. 21919 of 2024
SHIVAJIRAO KADAM INSTIUTE OF TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT
RUN BY TRANSNATIONAL KNOWLEDGE SOCIETY SAMITI TH
Versus
RAJIV GANDHI PROUDYOGIKI VISHWAVIDYALAYA (STATE
TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY OF MADHYA PRADESH ) AIRPORT ROA
AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Veer Kumar Jain - Sr. Advocate with Shri Vaibhav Jain - Advocate
for the petitioner.
Shri Manoj Kumar Dwivedi - Advocate through VC and Shri Vikas
Jaiswal - Advocate for the respondent No.1.
Shri Shrey Raj Saxena - Dy.AG for respondent No.2.
WRIT PETITION No. 22301 of 2024
GURUKUL BUSINESS SCHOOL THROUGH ITS REPRESENTATIVE
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH ADDITIOANAL
CHIEF SECRETARY AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Kaivalya Ratnaparkhe - Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri Shrey Raj Saxena - Dy.AG for respondent No.1 and 2.
Shri Manoj Kumar Dwivedi - Advocate through VC and Shri Vikas
Jaiswal - Advocate for the respondent No.3.
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: VARGHESE
MATHEW
Signing time: 24-06-2025
14:48:22
9 WP-17701-2024
Shri Ajinkya Dagaonkar - Advocate for respondent No. 4.
WRIT PETITION No. 22681 of 2024
VICTORIA COLLEGE RUN BY SAHIB SHIKSHA AVAM SAMAJ
KALYAN SAMITI THROUGH TREASURER IMRAN KHAN
Versus
RAJIV GANDHI PROUDYOGIKI VISHWAVIDYALAYA AND
OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Veer Kumar Jain - Sr. Advocate with Shri Vaibhav Jain - Advocate
for the petitioner.
Shri Manoj Kumar Dwivedi - Advocate through VC and Shri Vikas
Jaiswal - Advocate for the respondent No.1.
Shri Shrey Raj Saxena - Dy.AG for respondents No.2 and 3.
WRIT PETITION No. 24158 of 2024
MODERN INSTITUTE OF PHARMACEUTICAL SCIENCES
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Rajat Lohia - Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri Shrey Raj Saxena - Dy.AG for respondents No.1.
Shri Ajinkya Dagaonkar - Advocate for respondents No. 2 to 4.
Shri Manoj Kumar Dwivedi - Advocate through VC and Shri Vikas
Jaiswal - Advocate for the respondent No.3.
Heard On - 20/06/2025
Pronounced On - 24/06/2025
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: VARGHESE
MATHEW
Signing time: 24-06-2025
14:48:22
10 WP-17701-2024
ORDER
Per: Justice Vijay Kumar Shukla
Regard being had to the similitude of facts, grounds and the issues
involved in all the petitions, they are being disposed off by the common
order. For the sake of convenience, the facts are noted from WP
No.17681/2024, treating it to be a lead case.
[2] The petitions have been filed by the Colleges run by private
societies. The petitioner College was established to impart education to
students in various courses. The petitioner college, with the object of
imparting Master of Business Administration (MBA) education, had taken
due permission and has been running the said courses along with other
courses for the last many years. The colleges who are petitioners in WP
No.24158/2024 i.e. Modern Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences, WP
No.17701/2024 New Era College of Management, WP No.21740/2024
Oxford International College of Management and WP No.21919/2024
Shivajirao Kadam Institute of Technology Management are running MBA
courses in Pharmaceutical and Integrated Courses. The petitioners had taken
approval from the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE)
because MBA is a technical course. While applying for the approval, a
college is required to declare the affiliating body (university/body) for which
the college will take affiliation. The petitioner had applied to the respondent
No.1 University for issuance of order so that the petitioner may apply for
permission/approval from AICTE. The respondent No.1 University had
granted approval. On the basis of the same, petitioner had applied for
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: VARGHESE
MATHEW
Signing time: 24-06-2025
14:48:22
11 WP-17701-2024
approval/permission to the AICTE mentioning the name of the respondent
No.1 University as affiliating body. The approval was granted by AICTE for
session 2022-2023 for three courses MBA, MBA (Financial Administration)
and MBA (Marketing Management) which was subject to affiliation granted
by the respondent No.1. The petitioner had applied and was granted
affiliation by the respondent No.1 for these three courses for Session 2022-
2023 after due inspection. In the same manner for renewal of affiliation for
the year 2023-2024 the petitioner had applied from AICTE which was
accordingly granted. As a consequence the petitioner college was granted
renewal of permission/approval by AICTE for session 2024-2025. The
respondent University had also published information dated 22.12.2023
whereby the colleges were asked to pay the fees for renewal of affiliation for
Session 2024-25. The petitioner had paid fee for the renewal of affiliation
for Sessions 2024-25. All the formalities were completed for the renewal of
affiliation of the petitioner College for the session 2024-25. All of a sudden,
an order/notification dated 13.6.2024 was issued stating that the respondent
No.1 will not give affiliation of MBA courses from Sessions 2024-25. It was
also mentioned that affiliation granted till the session of 2023-2024 will be
valid and the students who had taken admission in the courses for the said
session will complete their course as per the affiliation granted for the said
year. The said decision of the University dated 13.6.2024 is illegal and
arbitrary. The decision has been taken in pursuant to the decision taken by
the University Co-ordination Committee constituted under Madhya Pradesh
Vishwavidyalay Adhiniyam, 1973 (hereinafter referred as “Adhiniyam,
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: VARGHESE
MATHEW
Signing time: 24-06-2025
14:48:22
12 WP-17701-2024
1973″) which is not binding on the respondent University which is
established under Special Enactment called The Madhya Pradesh Rajiv
Gandhi Proudhyogiki Vishwavidyalay Adhiniyam, 1998 (hereinafter referred
as “Adhiniyam, 1998”). The decision taken by the University had left with
no other option with the petitioner College to seek affiliation from other
universities. The affiliation process for taking affiliation for MBA course
from any other university is already closed. Thus, the decision of the
University has jeopardised the petitioner’s College as they had to close the
MBA courses for academic session 2024-25. The colleges who are
petitioners in WP No.24158/2024 i.e. Modern Institute of Pharmaceutical
Sciences, WP No.17701/2024 New Era College of Management, WP
No.21740/2024 Oxford International College of Management and WP
No.21919/2024 Shivajirao Kadam Institute of Technology Management
were running MBA in Pharmaceutical and Integrated Courses and these
courses are not available in any local university included in the Schedule of
Adhiniyam, 1973. The aforesaid course was only available with the
respondent No.1 University. Thus, the impugned decision by the University
is without due application of mind and the same has been taken in pursuance
to the decision taken by the Co-ordination Committee constituted under
Adhiniyam, 1973. There is a violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of
India.
[3] The notices were issued on 5.7.2024. On 12.7.2024, this court
passed the following order:-
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: VARGHESE
MATHEW
Signing time: 24-06-2025
14:48:22
13 WP-17701-2024
“After having heard the learned counsel for the parties, this Court
deems it appropriate to permit the petitioner colleges to participate
in the ongoing/proposed counselling for the MBA course for the
academic session 2024-25. The respondents are directed to permit
the petitioner colleges to participate in the ongoing/proposes
counselling for the MBA course for the academic session 2024-25.
However, it is made clear that the permissions so also the
participation of the students and their admissions shall remain
subject to final outcome of the writ petitions and no equity would
be claimed by any of the parties.”
[4] In pursuance to the aforesaid interim order, the petitioner college
had given admission to the students after the Counselling. The respondent
University filed their preliminary reply and submitted that the affiliation was
being granted to the colleges for conducting professional courses for
Diploma and Degree courses by the respondent University, however,
objections were raised by the Vice Chancellors of the other Universities
against the affiliation granted by the respondent No.1 University to the
colleges for MBA courses. A meeting was held by the University Co-
ordination Committee under the Chairmanship of the Hon’ble Governor
(Chancellor of all the Universities) and Vice Chancellors of the universities
and in its meeting 101, it was decided that the affiliation to the colleges for
MBA courses shall be granted to the universities established under the
Adhiniyam. 1973. Thus, by the said decision affiliation of MBA courses
have been confined only to the universities established under Adhiniyam,
1973. In view of the said decision, meeting of the Academic Council was
convened by the respondent No.1 University and the Academic Council
resolved that in the light of decision of the University Co-ordination
Committee, no further affiliation to the colleges for MBA Courses shall be
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: VARGHESE
MATHEW
Signing time: 24-06-2025
14:48:22
14 WP-17701-2024
granted. The said decision was further placed before the Apex Body of the
respondent No.1 University i.e. Executive Council on 28.3.2024, and the
Executive Council had taken a decision that no further affiliation shall be
granted by the said university to the colleges for MBA courses. The same
was duly approved by the Vice Chancellor of the respondent No.1
University. It is absolutely an administrative decision taken by the Co-
ordination Committee under the Chairmanship of the Chancellor as
empowered by Article 153 of the Constitution of India, which has been duly
approved by the respondent No.1 University. There is no illegality in the
same. The respondents filed additional affidavit stating that in compliance to
the order passed by this Court the students admitted for the year 2024-2025
will be allowed to continue their course, but no affiliation will be given to
the colleges by the respondents for MBA Course as per the decision taken in
meeting 101 by the University Co-ordination Committee.
[5] Shri Ajinkya Dagaonkar – Advocate appearing for AICTE in
connected cases argued that in the light of the stand taken by the respondent
University, the petition has rendered infructuous as the students who were
admitted in compliance to interim order for the year 2024-25 have been
permitted to conclude their course and no relief is claimed by the petitioner
in respect of academic session 2025-26 in the Writ Petition.
[6] After hearing learned counsel for parties, the following questions
have arisen for consideration before this Court:-
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: VARGHESE
MATHEW
Signing time: 24-06-2025
14:48:22
15 WP-17701-2024
(i) Whether the decision of the University Co-ordination Committee is
binding on the respondent Rajiv Gandhi Proudhyogik Vishwavidyalaya ?
(ii) Whether the decision taken by the Respondent University not to
grant affiliation to the aforesaid courses is arbitrary and unreasonable ?.
[7] Before adverting to the aforesaid issues, it is apt to survey the
various judgments by the courts in respect of the power of the various
authorities in respect of grant of approval, affiliation and permission. In the
State of Tamil Nadu Vs. Adiyaman Educational Research Institute (1995) 4
SCC 104 it was held that the State laws must confirm to the central law in
the matter of technical education and affiliation. It was held that the AICTE
guidelines override State legislation in matters of technical education.
However, universities retained independent powers to grant affiliation, which
cannot be taken away by the executive direction of the State government. In
Jaya Gokul Educational Trust Vs. Commissioner & Secretary to Government
Higher Education Department, Thiruvanathapuram, Kerala State & another
(2000)5 SCC 231 it has been held that the State government cannot interfere
with the autonomy of a university in granting affiliation once AICTE
approval is obtained. The State government direction was quashed. The
Court had emphasized institutional autonomy and separation of powers. In
the case of Prof.Yeshpal Vs. State of Chhattisgarh (2005)5 SCC 420 , the
Court emphasizes that a university must ensure that its affiliated institutions
adhere to quality and academic standards prescribed by regulated bodies.
Also In the case of State of Maharashtra Vs. Sant Dnyaneshwar Shikshan
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: VARGHESE
MATHEW
Signing time: 24-06-2025
14:48:22
16 WP-17701-2024
Shastra Mahavidyalaya & Ors (2006)9 SCC 1, Maa Vaishno Devi Mahila
Mahavidyalaya Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors (2013) 2 SCC 617 and
Parshvanath Charitable Trust & Ors Vs. All India Council for Technical
Education & Ors. and connected case (2013) 3 SCC 385. It has been held
that the powers of the State government Universities and AICTE in matters
of affiliation are distinct yet interrelated. While the State government can
issue directions concerning educational policy and institutional regulations,
the University retains autonomy in academic matters within the statutory
framework; however, in the matter of technical education AICTEs statutory
provision is paramount and overrides conflicting State laws or university
regulations as per judicial precedence.
[8] It is relevant to mention here that in the present case, the
approval granted by AICTE was subject to affiliation granted by the
University. The same was one of the conditions of the approval by the
AICTE.
[9] We have to consider the issue that whether the decision of Co-
ordination Committee of the University under Adhiniyam, 1973 is binding
on the respondent No.1 University which is established under the
Adhiniyam, 1998. The respondent No.1 University is established under
Adhiniyam, 1998 was enacted to establish and incorporate a University of
technology for the purpose of ensuring systematic, efficient and qualitative
education in engineering and technology subjects including Architecture,
Pharmacy, Hospitality sector, Hotel Management, Catering Technology,
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: VARGHESE
MATHEW
Signing time: 24-06-2025
14:48:22
17 WP-17701-2024
Travel and Tourism and other degree and diploma level courses approved by
All India Council for Technical Education and matters connected there with.
As per the definition of Sec.2(i) ‘Vishwavidyalaya’ means ‘Rajiv Gandhi
Proudyogiki Vishwavidyalaya’. Section 2(vi) defines “Kuladhipati” means
Kuladhipati of the Vishwavidyalaya. Section 11 engrafts provisions relating
to Kuladhipati and his powers. As per the provisions of sub-section (i) of
Section 11, the Governor of Madhya Pradesh shall be the Kuladhipati of
Vishwavidyalaya. The powers of Kuladhipati are mentioned in sub-section
(3) of Section 11. Chapter IV of the Adhiniyam provides for the provision
relating to authorities of the Vishwavidyalaya. The Executive Council is
constituted u/S.25 of Adhiniyam and its powers are enumerated u/S.26. The
other universities of the State of Madhya Pradesh are included in the
Schedule are established under ‘Adhiniyam, 1973’. The respondent
University passed the impugned order/notification dated 13.6.2024 that no
further affiliation for MBA course from academic session 2024-25 shall be
granted. The aforesaid decision refers the decision taken by the University
Co-ordination Committee in its meeting 101 which was convened at Raj
Bhawan, Bhopal under the chairmanship of Hon’ble Governor (Chancellor)
and Vice Chancellors of the Universities. The decision taken by the Co-
ordination Committee that affiliation of the colleges for MBA course shall be
granted by the universities established under Adhiniyam, 1973 was
considered by the Academic Council and Executive Council of the
respondent No.1 University. The Academic Council of the respondent No.1
resolved not to grant affiliation for MBA course from the academic session
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: VARGHESE
MATHEW
Signing time: 24-06-2025
14:48:22
18 WP-17701-2024
2024-25. The said decision was duly approved by the apex body of the
University i.e. Executive Council in its meeting dated 28.3.2024.
[10] A Co-ordination Committee is constituted u/S.34 of Madhya
Pradesh Vishwa Vidyalaya Adhiniyam, 1973. The Chairman of the said
Committee is Kuladipathi who is the Governor of State of Madhya Pradesh.
After considering the provisions of the Adhiniyam 1998, it is held that the
respondent No.1 University is an independent authority and the decision
taken by the Co-ordination Committee is not binding on the respondent No.1
University, but the same has persuasive value. In the present case, the
decision taken by the Co-ordination Committee has been considered by the
Academic Council and the Executive Council which is the apex body of the
respondent No.1 University. Thereafter, a decision was taken by the
respondent No.1 University that no further affiliation shall be granted by the
University for MBA Courses from Session 2024-25. Thus, we do not find
any merit in the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that
order passed by the respondent No.1 University is without any application of
mind. The decision taken by the Co-ordination Committee was duly
considered by the Academic Council and Executive Council of the
respondent No.1 Rajiv Gandhi Proudhyogiki Vishvavidyalaya and the
impugned order was passed after due approval by the Vice Chancellor.
Accordingly, the first issue is answered that the decision taken by the Co-
ordination Committee is not binding on the respondent No.1 University but it
has persuasive value and the impugned order has been passed by the
respondent No.1 University after due consideration by the Academic Council
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: VARGHESE
MATHEW
Signing time: 24-06-2025
14:48:22
19 WP-17701-2024
and Executive Council, hence on this count there is no illegality in the
impugned order/notification.
[11] Regarding the second issue the learned counsel for petitioner
vehemently argued that after passing the impugned order on 13.6.2024, the
respondent University issued notice dated 18.12.2024 all the affiliated
colleges including the petitioner to pay the affiliation fees till 31.12.2024 and
also informed that after the said date late fee would be payable. The
petitioner and all the colleges which are affiliated to the respondent No.1
were given their respective login ids. They paid the affiliation fee for
renewal of the said course for Session 2025-26. All of a sudden the
respondent No.1 again issued notice dated 4.3.2025 informing that the
respondent No.1 will not give affiliation to any college for MBA course for
the session 2025-26 as per the earlier decision of the University Co-
ordination Committee. The issuance of notice dated 18.12.2024 led the
petitioner and other colleges to apply for renewal of affiliation with the
respondent No.1 without applying for renewal for affiliation to the other
universities. The last date for affiliation was 28.2.2024. Thus, the petitioner
could not get affiliation from other university. He also argued that the
colleges who are having some other courses like MBA Pharmaceutical and
Integrated Central course cannot apply for affiliation to any university of the
State as these courses are only recognised by the respondent No.1
University. The learned Sr. Counsel for the petitioner vigorously argued that
from the reply to para 6.1 to 6.7, it is vivid that the University was ready to
grant further affiliation, but only because of the decision of the Co-ordination
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: VARGHESE
MATHEW
Signing time: 24-06-2025
14:48:22
20 WP-17701-2024
Committee, the decision was taken not to grant affiliation for MBA courses,
hence the impugned decision is arbitray and unreasonable.
[12] Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent University argued
that the decision taken by the respondent University is not arbitrary. The
decision taken by the University not to grant affiliation for MBA courses
was duly considered by the Academic Council and then Executive Council,
the apex body of the university. The decision was also approved by the Vice
Chancellor of the University. In regard to the issuance of notice dated
18.12.2024 he argued that the affiliation fee is charged by the University not
for the entire course but year wise as per the provisions of sub-section (3) of
Sec.5 of Adhiniyam, 1998. The same cannot be construed to be an order of
affiliation for the year 2024-25. So far the students who have got admission
because of the interim order passed by this Court on 12.7.2024, the
respondents have filed a detailed affidavit on 28.3.2025 stating that the
aforesaid students shall be permitted to complete their course, however, no
affiliation shall be granted to the college for fresh admission for year 2025-
26. Counsel for respondent No.1 and AICTE argued that the petitioner was
well aware of the decision of the respondent University in June, 2024 itself
well within time that no further affiliation shall be granted by the respondent
No.1 University for MBA courses. Still they did not apply for affiliation to
the other universities of the State or Central universities. Annexure P/15
dated 18.12.2024 was a notice to demand affiliation fee year wise as the
students were admitted in light of the interim order dated 12.7.2024. The
said demand of affiliation fee was not for the entire course but was year
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: VARGHESE
MATHEW
Signing time: 24-06-2025
14:48:22
21 WP-17701-2024
wise. The letter dated 4.3.2025 is nothing but in the form of a reminder to
the colleges making it clear that the respondent No.1 shall not grant
affiliation for MBA courses for academic sessions 2024-25. The issuance of
the letter Annexure P/17 dated 4.3.3025 would not invalidate the decision of
the respondent University.
[13] After considering the aforesaid submissions and record of the
case, we are of the considered view that the decision of the respondent
University not to grant affiliation cannot be held to be arbitrary. The
petitioner college and the other colleges were made aware in the month of
June 2024 itself well within time that no further affiliation for MBA Courses
shall be granted. The petitioner could have applied for affiliation to the
other universities. The letter dated 18.12.2024 and sub-section (3) of Sec.5
of Adhiniyam 1998 make it clear that the demand of affiliation was year
wise and not for the course. The petitioner has failed to point out any
statutory provision that the University is bound to grant him affiliation. The
approval by AICTE was subject to affiliation by the University. There is no
arbitrariness in the decision taken by the respondent University not to grant
affiliation for MBA Courses further. It is within the competence of the
University to take a decision to grant or not to grant affiliation for a
particular course. The decision of University Co-ordination Committee was
duly considered by the Academic Council and Executive Council of the
respondent University. It is trite law that under the power of judicial review,
Courts cannot examine the decision of an authority under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India, and can only examine the decision-making process. A
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: VARGHESE
MATHEW
Signing time: 24-06-2025
14:48:22
22 WP-17701-2024
reference may be made to paragraphs 34, 39 and 40 of the judgment by Full
Bench in the case of Ashutosh Pawar Vs. High Court of MP & another
2018(2)MPLJ 419 and also the judgment passed by the Apex Court in the
cases of Roshina T Vs. Abdul Aziz K.T. & Ors. CA No.11759 of 2018 and
Sarvepalli Ramaiah & Ors. Vs. The District Collector, Chittoor District &
Ors CA No.7461 of 2009.
[14] In view of the aforesaid, question No.2 is answered that there is
no arbitrariness in the decision taken by the respondent University not to
grant affiliation for MBA and other courses for Session 2024-25. However,
as per the stand of the University, the students already admitted in pursuance
of the interim order shall be allowed to complete the course and the decision
not to grant affiliation to the aforesaid courses shall apply to the year 2025-
26.
[15] Hence, all the writ petitions are dismissed. No order as to
costs.
[16] In view of the final order passed in the writ petitions, no further
order is required to be passed in the Contempt Petition No.4017/2024.
Accordingly, the contempt is dropped and the contempt petition is disposed
off.
(VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA) (PREM NARAYAN SINGH) Signature Not Verified Signed by: VARGHESE MATHEW Signing time: 24-06-2025 14:48:22 23 WP-17701-2024 JUDGE JUDGE VM Signature Not Verified Signed by: VARGHESE MATHEW Signing time: 24-06-2025 14:48:22