Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

50. Seen thus, the above-extracted disclaimer clause does not make for easy reading, let alone understanding. The respondents would seek to interpret the word "Institute", as contained in the said clause, to be the college/Institute to which the students seek to migrate, and the word "college" as the "parent" college/University. That interpretation, however, presents more than one difficulty. How, in the first place, could the Clause declare that issuance of NOC, by the college to which the student seeks to migrate, would "mean consent for migration given by the college" from which the student seeks to migrate? Interestingly, in the case of Petitioner No. 4 in W.P. (C) 12097/2018 (Om Sudhir Vidyarthi), the documents on record indicate that NOC was granted by the parent University, i.e. the Amity University, Uttar Pradesh on 17th July, 2018, whereas NOC had been granted by the Respondent No 2-College, i.e. the VIPS prior thereto, on 2nd July, 2018. This militates against interpreting the disclaimer clause, in the Notice, dated 9th August, 2018, as meaning that grant of NOC, by the College to which the student seeks migration, implied grant of consent, for migration, by the "parent" College.

51. A more reasonable interpretation, of the said disclaimer clause appears, in the opinion of this Court, to be that grant of NOC, by the Institute/college, to which the student seeks migration, would imply grant of consent, by the said Institute/college, thereto, but would not be a guarantee that migration would be allowed by the GGSIPU. Even if one were to accord, to the Clause, such an interpretation, that would still not justify the GGSIPU taking its own time to decide the migration applications, and rejecting them at the eleventh hour. As such, the above-extracted disclaimer clause, as contained in the Notice dated 9th August, 2018, can support the respondent's case only so much, and no more.