Prasarak Mandal Vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors.  INSC 626 (26 March
JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.3346 OF 2002 Chintamani Shikshan Prasarak Mandal
...Appellant(s) Versus State of Maharashtra and Ors. ...Respondent(s)
O R D E R
Heard learned counsel
for the parties.
This is an appeal for
setting asid1e the order of the Division Bench of Bombay High Court whereby
permission granted by the State Government to the appellant for starting new
college at Ghugus, District Chandrapur was declared illegal and quashed.
submitted an application dated 21.10.1998 to Nagpur University, Nagpur [for
short "the University"] for grant of permission to start an Arts and
Commerce College at Ghugus. Respondent no.3 also made similar application on
29.10.1998. The University forwarded both the applications to the State
Government though recommendation was made only in favour of respondent no.3. In
July 1999, a Committee comprising of the then Chief Minister, Deputy Chief
Minister and Education Minister considered various applications filed for grant
of permission to set up colleges at various places in the State. For Ghugus,
the Committee decided to grant permission to the appellant for starting the
college from academic year 1999-2000. Thereafter, the appellant established the
college and admitted students for the academic year 1999-2000.
Respondent no.3 filed
Writ Petition No. 4420/1999 for quashing the decision of the State Government.
He pleaded that there did not exist any extra- ordinary reason which could
justify the State Government's action to allow the appellant herein to
establish college ignoring the fact that the University had not recommended its
case. In the counter-affidavit it was claimed that the provisions of Section 82
of the Maharashtra Universities Act, 1994 [in short, "the Act"] are not
attracted in the case because the University had not prepared perspective plan
as per the requirement of sub-section (1) of Section 82. It was then pleaded
that the State Government could, in exercise of its discretionary power under
the proviso to sub- section (5) of Section 82, grant permission to the
The High Court, after
noticing the factual matrix of the case, held that without recording specific
reasons for doing so, the State Government could not have granted permission to
respondent no.1 (appellant herein) by exercising its discretionary power under
proviso to sub-section (5) of Section 82 of the Act despite the fact that its
case had not been recommended by the University.
While issuing notice
of the special leave petition filed by the appellant, which was, later on
converted into this appeal, the Court directed that there shall be stay in the
meantime and by virtue of that order, the college established by the appellant
has been functioning for last almost ten years.
At the hearing,
learned counsel for the appellant brought to the Court's notice that in terms
of Section 82(1) of the Act, the University has prepared perspective plan which
envisages establishment of six colleges in Chandrapur ....3/- -3- District for
the academic years 2008-2009 to 2013-2014 and Ghugus is one of the locations
where college is to be established. Learned counsel for the University stated
that he is not in a position to controvert the assertions of the appellant's
In view of the
afore-mentioned development, we do not consider it necessary to go into the
merits of the impugned order, but, at the same time, we are satisfied that it
would be just and expedient to set aside the impugned order so that functioning
of the college established by the appellant may not be adversely affected.
appeal is allowed, impugned order is set aside and the writ petition filed by
respondent no. 3 is dismissed leaving the question of law open to be decided in
an appropriate case. No costs.