Madhya Pradesh High Court
Modern Institute Of Pharmaceutical ... vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 24 June, 2025
Author: Vijay Kumar Shukla
Bench: Vijay Kumar Shukla, Prem Narayan Singh
1 WP-24158-2024
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-24158-2024
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-24158-2024
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-24158-2024
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-24158-2024
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-24158-2024
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-24158-2024
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-24158-2024
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-24158-2024
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-24158-2024
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-24158-2024 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-24158-2024 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 14:48:2213 WP-24158-2024 "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-24158-2024 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 14:48:2215 WP-24158-2024
(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-24158-2024 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-24158-2024 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-24158-2024 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-24158-2024 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-24158-2024 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-24158-2024 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-24158-2024 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-24158-2024 JUDGE JUDGE VM Signature Not Verified Signed by: VARGHESE MATHEW Signing time: 24-06-2025 14:48:22