YASHPAL Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH
LAWS(SC)-2005-2-13
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: CHHATTISGARH)
Decided on February 11,2005

YASHPAL Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Respondents





Cited Judgements :-

HARIDAS VS. ATHIRA [LAWS(KER)-2020-12-545] [REFERRED TO]
MOTHER TERESA EDUCATION FOUNDATION AND OTHERS VS. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS [LAWS(P&H)-2017-3-315] [REFERRED TO]
GURMEET KAUR VS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS [LAWS(P&H)-2013-9-843] [REFERRED]
SUGANYA JEBA SAROJINI VS. TAMIL NADU DR. AMBEDKAR LAW UNIVERSITY [LAWS(MAD)-2024-3-71] [REFERRED TO]
RUCHIRA SETHI VS. UNIVERSITY GRANTS COMMISSION BAHADUR SHA ZAFAR MARG NEW DELHI [LAWS(MAD)-2012-1-116] [REFERRED TO]
SRM UNIVERSITY VS. SECRETARY, UNIVERSITY GRANTS COMMISSION, BAHADUR SHAH JAFAR MARG [LAWS(MAD)-2011-8-515] [REFERRED]
UNION OF INDIA AND ANR; RETD SARGENT AIR FORCE GOVIND RAM; TARA DEVI SARAWGI & ANR; RAJASTHAN BUILDERS & PROMOTERS ASSOCIATION VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS [LAWS(RAJ)-2014-5-407] [REFERRED]
ALIGARH MUSLIM UNIVERSITY VS. NARESH AGARWAL & ORS [LAWS(SC)-2019-2-166] [REFERRED TO]
VINEET SINGH, S/O MAHENDER PRATAP SINGH VS. STATE OF SIKKIM [LAWS(SIK)-2016-11-6] [REFERRED TO]
B BHARAT KUMAR VS. OSMANIA UNIVERSITY [LAWS(SC)-2007-5-56] [DISTINGUISHED]
PUNJAB AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY TEACHERS ASSOCIATION VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-2006-4-167] [REFERRED TO]
SUJATHA BABU NAKAMAN VS. SPECIAL OFFICER CENTRALISED ADMISSION CELL BANGALORE [LAWS(KAR)-2005-6-12] [REFERRED TO]
PUSHPAGIRI MEDICAL SOCIETY VS. STATE OF KERALA [LAWS(KER)-2006-1-79] [REFERRED TO]
K. VIJAYAKUMAR AND ORS. VS. THE MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY AND ORS. [LAWS(KER)-2015-2-130] [REFERRED TO]
ABUL KALAM TALUKDAR VS. STATE OF ASSAM [LAWS(GAU)-2019-6-100] [REFERRED TO]
AMITY UNIVERSITY UTTAR PRADESH VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(DLH)-2007-7-172] [REFERRED TO]
BOMBAY ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION GROUP VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2005-10-116] [REFERRED TO]
GAUTAM SHANKAR S/O UDAY KUMAR VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(GJH)-2016-11-150] [REFERRED TO]
SAM HIGGINBOTTOM UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURE, TECHNOLOGY & SCIENCE VS. UNIVERSITY GRANTS COMMISSION [LAWS(DLH)-2015-12-150] [REFERRED TO]
INDIAN RADIOLOGICAL AND IMAGING ASSOCIATION (IRIA) VS. UNION OF INDIA AND ANR [LAWS(DLH)-2016-2-94] [REFERRED TO]
ASHWANI KUMAR SHUKLA VS. HONBLE KULADHAPATI, NARENDRA DEV UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURE AND TECHNOLOGY [LAWS(ALL)-2005-6-46] [REFERRED]
AJAN BHATTACHARYA VS. STATE OF WEST BENGAL [LAWS(CAL)-2006-6-45] [REFERRED TO]
SHIVAJI GROUP OF EDUCATION VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(MPH)-2017-2-154] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF TAMIL NADU REPRESENTED BY ITS ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT VS. ALL INDIA COUNCIL FOR TECHNICAL EDUCATION [LAWS(MAD)-2012-7-146] [REFERRED TO]
TRIVENI EDUCATIONAL AND SOCIAL ... VS. STATE OF HARYANA AND ANR [LAWS(P&H)-2017-12-24] [REFERRED TO]
ANTARYAMI ACHARYA VS. ODISHA UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURE & TECHNOLOGY [LAWS(ORI)-2012-4-43] [REFERRED TO]
PRIYANKA KUMARI VS. STATE OF BIHAR [LAWS(PAT)-2019-4-21] [REFERRED TO]
ALIGARH MUSLIM UNIVERSITY VS. NARESH AGARWAL [LAWS(SC)-2024-11-30] [REFERRED TO]
BAHARUL ISLAM VS. INDIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION [LAWS(SC)-2023-1-71] [REFERRED TO]
PRANEETH K. VS. UNIVERSITY GRANTS COMMISSION [LAWS(SC)-2020-8-42] [REFERRED TO]
MANOJ KUMAR AND OTHERS VS. STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS [LAWS(P&H)-2006-11-153] [REFERRED]
KUNJA BIHARI PANDA VS. STATE OF ODISHA [LAWS(ORI)-2022-1-40] [REFERRED TO]
ANUPAM SHARMA VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2009-1-48] [REFERRED TO]
MAHARANA PRATAP UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURE AND TECHNOLOGY VS. L L SHARMA [LAWS(RAJ)-2010-8-86] [REFERRED TO]
RAKESH SONI VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2006-5-14] [REFERRED TO]
MANOJ SINGH VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS. [LAWS(RAJ)-2007-12-38] [REFERRED TO]
AIMAN AHAMED KHAN VS. STATE OF KRNATAKA [LAWS(KAR)-2009-9-26] [REFERRED TO]
ASHUTOSH SHRIVASTAVA VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND ORS. [LAWS(MPH)-2015-10-18] [REFERRED TO]
CHIEF EXECUTIVE TRUSTEE VS. STATE OF KERALA [LAWS(KER)-2007-1-643] [REFERRED TO]
SUMITHRA DEVI VS. STATE OF KERALA [LAWS(KER)-2007-10-51] [REFERRED TO]
SHISHU JYOT KALYAN AND KELAVANI TRUST VS. GUJARAT SECONDARY EDUCATION BOARD [LAWS(GJH)-2005-3-44] [REFERRED TO]
MUKTA RAM DEKA VS. STATE OF ASSAM [LAWS(GAU)-2013-5-47] [REFERRED TO]
SIDDHARTH KAUL VS. GURU GOBIND SINGH INDRAPRASTHA UNIVERSITY [LAWS(DLH)-2011-12-79] [REFERRED TO]
TULASE MAHANKALI VS. ANDHRA UNIVERSITY [LAWS(APH)-2006-3-99] [REFERRED TO]
B SURYA PRAKASH RAO GEO ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT A U ENGINEERING COLLEGE VISAKHAPATNAM VS. UNION OF INDIA MINISTRY OF HRD REP BY ITS SECRETARY NEW DELHI [LAWS(APH)-2011-1-78] [REFERRED TO]
DHANPAL VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2013-10-56] [REFERRED TO]
BANSAL ACADEMY VS. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH [LAWS(CHH)-2006-2-26] [REFERRED TO]
SUKUMAR MUKHERJEE VS. MEDICAL COUNCIL OF INDIA [LAWS(CAL)-2014-8-18] [REFERRED TO]
BIMAL MAITI VS. UNIVERSITY OF KALYANI & ORS [LAWS(CAL)-2018-7-34] [REFERRED TO]
COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE VS. INDORAMA TEXTILES LTD [LAWS(BOM)-2006-5-48] [REFERRED TO]
MONARK EDUCATION TRUST THROUGHMANAGING TRUSTEE MOHANBHAI VS. REGIONAL DIRECTOR NATIONAL COUNCIL OF TEACHER EDUCATION [LAWS(GJH)-2012-11-9] [REFERRED TO]
PROF S S BINDRA AND ORS VS. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS [LAWS(P&H)-2011-3-985] [REFERRED]
SRI RAVI SHANKAR MAHARAJ AND OTHERS VS. STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, PUNJAB AND OTHERS [LAWS(P&H)-2012-3-157] [REFERRED TO]
DR. BHURA SINGH GHUMAN VS. PANJAB UNIVERSITY, CHANDIGARH AND OTHERS [LAWS(P&H)-2016-8-39] [REFERRED TO]
MAHARSHI MAHESH YOGI VEDIC VS. STATE OF M.P. [LAWS(SC)-2013-7-48] [REFERRED TO]
CHRISTIAN MEDICAL COLLEGE VELLORE VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(SC)-2013-7-105] [REFERRED TO]
JYOTI AGARWAL VS. STATE OF SIKKIM [LAWS(SIK)-2021-8-15] [REFERRED TO]
ACADEMIC SOCIETY OF ARCHITECTS, (TASA) VS. COUNCIL OF ARCHITECTURE (COA) [LAWS(MAD)-2019-6-232] [REFERRED TO]
CANADIAN COMPUTER MANAGEMENT CENTER (CCMC) VS. STATE AND ORS. [LAWS(UTN)-2010-12-149] [REFERRED TO]
MAHENDRA VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2021-3-113] [REFERRED TO]
TATA COMMUNICATIONS LTD , THROUGH ITS ASSISTANT MANAGER (HR) V GEETHA VS. TELECOM REGULATORY AUTHORITY OF INDIA [LAWS(MAD)-2018-7-25] [REFERRED TO]
SURESH K. AND ORS. VS. STATE OF KERALA AND ORS. [LAWS(KER)-2020-12-484] [REFERRED TO]
MRITTIKA SEN GUPTA VS. CHAIRMAN BANGALORE UNIVERSITY [LAWS(KAR)-2005-8-28] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GUJARAT VS. HARSHITKUMAR BHARATBHAI JANI [LAWS(GJH)-2023-9-104] [REFERRED TO]
PROMILA DEVI VS. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH [LAWS(HPH)-2022-3-34] [REFERRED TO]
AMANDEEP SINGH VS. UNIVERSITY OF DELHI AND ORS. [LAWS(DLH)-2015-8-2] [REFERRED TO]
AMBAJI PHYSIOTHERAPY COLLEGE MANAGED BY AMBAJI EDUCATION VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2011-9-117] [REFERRED TO]
THAKOR MITENDRASINH NARPATSINH VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2022-4-1635] [REFERRED TO]
RIJU PRASAD SARMA VS. STATE OF ASSAM [LAWS(GAU)-2011-10-21] [REFERRED TO]
RAJNEESH BHAN VS. STATE [LAWS(J&K)-2020-3-63] [REFERRED TO]
AMIT KUMAR VS. DELHI UNIVERSITY [LAWS(DLH)-2014-11-206] [REFERRED TO]
SUNITA KUSHWAHA NARAIN SINGH VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [LAWS(ALL)-2005-12-101] [REFERRED TO]
SHASHI KUMAR DWIVEDI AND OTHERS VS. STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS [LAWS(ALL)-2017-3-93] [REFERRED TO]
RAMAPATI SINGH & OTHERS VS. SATYA NARAYAN SINGH & OTHERS [LAWS(ALL)-2017-11-403] [REFERRED TO]
ITM TRUST VS. EDUCATE INDIA SOCIETY [LAWS(BOM)-2014-9-62] [REFERRED TO]
AKHAURI BIJAY PRAKASH SINHA VS. STATE OF BIHAR [LAWS(PAT)-2014-1-6] [REFERRED TO]
PRAKASH CHATURVEDI VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2006-7-2] [REFERRED TO]
SATISH KUMAR VS. STATE OF HARYANA [LAWS(P&H)-2012-5-265] [REFERRED TO]
SUNKISHELA DHEERAJ VS. STATE OF TELANGANA [LAWS(TLNG)-2023-2-108] [REFERRED TO]
SANIT DEBROY VS. STATE OF TRIPURA [LAWS(TRIP)-2019-8-63] [REFERRED TO]
BUSINESS INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT STUDIES VS. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AND ORS. [LAWS(HPH)-2016-4-57] [REFERRED TO]
FINITE INFRATECH LTD VS. IFCI [LAWS(DLH)-2010-7-97] [REFERRED TO]
DR. N. RAVEENDRAN VS. UNIVERSITY GRANTS COMMISSION AND ORS. [LAWS(KER)-2010-10-514] [REFERRED TO]
MANIPAL UNIVERSITY VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(KAR)-2013-12-6] [REFERRED TO]
UNIVERSITY GRANTS COMMISSION AND ORS. VS. PUNAL KUMAR DAS AND ORS. [LAWS(GAU)-2015-7-35] [REFERRED TO]
PROMILA DEVI VS. STATE OF H.P. [LAWS(HPH)-2012-12-145] [REFERRED TO]
BUNGA PADMAJA VS. P LALITHA KUMARI [LAWS(APH)-2006-9-188] [REFERRED TO]
RAM PAL SINGH VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2006-3-44] [REFERRED TO]
RAJENDRA B LAL VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2005-9-150] [REFERRED TO]
AJAY KUMAR VS. UNIVERSITY OF DELHI [LAWS(DLH)-2010-10-62] [REFERRED TO]
CFA INSTITUTE VS. ALL INDIA COUNCIL FOR TECHNICAL EDUCATION [LAWS(DLH)-2007-12-131] [REFERRED TO]
NIRAV LALITBHAI SHAH VS. GOVERNMENT OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2008-11-151] [REFERRED TO]
MULANI AKASH JAYSUKHBHAI VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(GJH)-2011-8-243] [REFERRED]
VISMAYAS MAX ANIMATION ACADEMY VS. MAHATHMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY AND ORS. [LAWS(KER)-2015-9-22] [REFERRED TO]
APARNA MISHRA VS. NATIONAL EDUCATION SOCIETY FOR TRIBAL STUDENTS [LAWS(DLH)-2025-3-128] [REFERRED TO]
KHURSHEED AHMAD SHEIKH VS. STATETLT [LAWS(J&K)-2012-6-1] [REFERRED TO]
VIDYANAGAR WOMENS B ED COLLEGE VS. NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR TEACHER EDUCATION [LAWS(GJH)-2012-9-372] [REFERRED TO]
AMITY BUSINESS SCHOOL VS. ALL INDIA COUNCIL FOR TECHNICAL EDUCATION [LAWS(ALL)-2007-6-27] [REFERRED TO]
BRIJESH KUMAR BHADAURIYA VS. STATE OF U P AND 3 OTHERS [LAWS(ALL)-2018-5-794] [REFERRED TO]
DR. BRAHMANAND PATHAK VS. STATE OF U.P. THORUGH SECY. HIGHER EDU. AND ORS. [LAWS(ALL)-2011-3-529] [REFERRED TO]
MEDHAVI KRISHNA VS. UNIVERSITY OF DELHI AND ORS [LAWS(DLH)-2016-12-24] [REFERRED TO]
PROF B SURYA PRAKASH RAO VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(APH)-2011-1-85] [REFERRED TO 12.]
SHIRISH AVINASH NAIK DESAI SON OF LATE AVINASH NAIK DESAI VS. BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF PORT OF MORMUGAO [LAWS(BOM)-2018-7-80] [REFERRED TO]
AKOLE TALUKA EDUCATION SOCIETY AKOLE VS. ALL INDIA COUNCIL FOR TECHNICAL EDUCATION [LAWS(BOM)-2014-2-52] [REFERRED TO]
NARINDER BATRA VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(DLH)-2009-3-156] [REFERRED TO]
UTKAL RANJAN MOHANTY VS. CHAIRMAN, DISTANCE EDUCATION COUNCIL [LAWS(ORI)-2014-1-87] [REFERRED TO]
RAJASTHAN TEXTILE MILLS VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(RAJ)-2012-10-131] [REFERRED TO]
ARUN KUMAR VS. GURU RAVI DAS AYURVED UNIVERSITY AND OTHERS [LAWS(P&H)-2016-9-259] [REFERRED TO]
CANARA TECHNOLOGIES LTD VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(MPH)-2007-8-43] [REFERRED TO]
RASHMI RAJAK VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(MPH)-2012-9-258] [REFERRED TO]
MARTIN LUTHER CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY VS. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. [LAWS(MEGH)-2015-12-5] [REFERRED TO]
B.S. MEENA AND OTHERS VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND OTHERS [LAWS(RAJ)-2018-10-22] [REFERRED TO]
S.S. BINDRA VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-2011-3-302] [REFERRED TO]
B N DEVADAS VS. UNIVERSITY GRANTS COMMISSION [LAWS(MAD)-2007-10-297] [REFERRED TO]
H-PRIVATE UNIVERSITIES MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION VS. STATE OF H.P. [LAWS(HPH)-2013-10-27] [REFERRED TO]
UNIVERSITY GRANTS COMMISSION VS. ANNAMALAI UNIVERSITY [LAWS(MAD)-2023-1-372] [REFERRED TO]
TIRUPATHI KUMAR VS. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA REP.BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER INVESTIGATION DEPARTMENT MITTA COURT, B WING [LAWS(MAD)-2022-6-235] [REFERRED TO]
R M SHARMA VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2011-12-38] [REFERRED TO]
MALA MUKHERJEE VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(CAL)-2014-11-15] [REFERRED TO]
AKANKSHA GAUTAM VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2012-3-261] [REFERRED TO]
SHASHI KUMAR DWIVEDI VS. STATE OF U.P [LAWS(ALL)-2012-10-25] [REFERRED TO]
KUNAL SAHA VS. UNIVERSITY OF CALCUTTA [LAWS(CAL)-2022-5-12] [REFERRED TO]
SUMAN KALYAN NAYAK VS. THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS. [LAWS(CAL)-2016-4-225] [REFERRED TO]
SARVODAY KELAVNI SAMAJ & 1 VS. STATE OF GUJARAT & 2 [LAWS(GJH)-2015-10-330] [REFERRED]
MAHESH KUMAR VS. DIRECTORATE OF EDUCATION [LAWS(DLH)-2007-3-185] [REFERRED TO]
POOJA SHARMA VS. STATE (NCT OF DELHI) & ANR [LAWS(DLH)-2015-2-631] [REFERRED]
DELHI COLLEGE OF EDUCATION VS. GURU GOBIND SINGH INDRAPRASTHA UNIVERSITY & ORS [LAWS(DLH)-2014-3-449] [REFERRED]
ARVIND SHARMA VS. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AND ANOTHER [LAWS(HPH)-2017-4-61] [REFERRED TO]
ADARSH BALA MEDICAL INSTITUTE VS. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH [LAWS(HPH)-2017-5-9] [REFERRED TO]
BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA VS. SAVEETHA INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL AND TECHNICAL SCIENCES [LAWS(MAD)-2007-8-260] [REFERRED TO]
V BALAJI VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(MAD)-2008-11-131] [REFERRED TO]
S PALANIVEL VS. PRICIPAL PODICHERRY ENGINEERING COLLEGE [LAWS(MAD)-2009-11-206] [REFERRED TO]
SONY VS. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE [LAWS(KER)-2017-7-56] [REFERRED TO]
ANANDAVALLY M K VS. P G JAIRAJ [LAWS(KER)-2013-12-90] [REFERRED TO]
KARTHIK JAYACHANDRAN VS. RAJIV GANDHI UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES [LAWS(KAR)-2006-3-40] [REFERRED TO]
DR. AMALENDU NAG VS. THE STATE OF ASSAM AND 3 ORS. [LAWS(GAU)-2018-7-130] [REFERRED TO]
GNANYOG EDUCATION AND WELFARE TRUST VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2008-9-132] [REFERRED TO]
GYANJYOT EDUCATION TRUST VS. GOVERNMENT OF INDIA [LAWS(GJH)-2012-10-190] [REFERRED TO]
HARDIK M PATEL VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2012-8-232] [REFERRED TO]
MO KAREEM VS. GURU GOBIND SINGH INDRAPRASTHA UNIVERSITY [LAWS(DLH)-2020-1-247] [REFERRED TO]
K L SEHGAL VS. OFFICE OF DISTRICT APPROPRIATE AUTHORITY [LAWS(DLH)-2010-7-186] [REFERRED TO]
B N DEVADAS VS. UNIVERSITY GRANTS COMMISSION [LAWS(MAD)-2009-6-169] [REFERRED TO]
DR. USHA V. PARAMESWARAN VS. STATE OF KERALA [LAWS(KER)-2023-3-16] [REFERRED TO]
SHAHRUKH SHAMSHAD VS. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. [LAWS(ALL)-2015-8-76] [REFERRED TO]
RAM HARSH TEWARI AND ANR VS. REX, THROUGH RANG RAMANUJ PRASAD NARAIN SINGH [LAWS(ALL)-2011-3-544] [REFERRED]
RAWATPURA SARKAR UNIVERSITY VS. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH [LAWS(CHH)-2021-2-82] [REFERRED TO]
JOSEPH BAIN DSOUZA VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2005-10-99] [REFERRED TO]
SHRI HANUMAN VYAYAM PRASARAK MANDAL VS. UNION OF INDIA THROUGH MINISTRY OF HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE [LAWS(BOM)-2012-7-166] [REFERRED TO]
SUNIL GAYAPRASAD MISHRA VS. RASHTRA SANT TUKDOJI MAHARAJ UNIVERSITY [LAWS(BOM)-2012-8-172] [REFERRED TO]
CHAYANIKA BHATTACHARYA VS. UNIVERSITY OF CALCUTTA AND ORS. [LAWS(CAL)-2016-4-69] [REFERRED TO]
MD BABUL AKTAR VS. MD NAZIR HOSSAIN [LAWS(CAL)-2019-10-17] [REFERRED TO]
SRINKHAL EDUCATIONAL & WELFARE SOCIETY VS. NEERU PANCHAL [LAWS(DELCDRC)-2009-1-8] [REFERRED TO]
BIJU PATNAIK UNIVERSITY VS. SAIRAM COLLEGE [LAWS(ORI)-2010-2-2] [REFERRED TO]
SIKKIM MANIPAL UNIVERSITY VS. INDIRA GANDHI NATIONAL OPEN UNIVERSITY [LAWS(SIK)-2015-6-16] [REFERRED TO]
INDORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY VS. MANOHARLAL ETC. [LAWS(SC)-2020-3-83] [REFERRED TO]
KARTAR SINGH VS. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS [LAWS(P&H)-2012-11-152] [REFERRED]
VINOD BRAMHAN (AGNIHOTRI) VS. STATE OF M.P. [LAWS(MPH)-2013-9-55] [REFERRED TO]
ASSOCIATION OF SELF-FINANCING UNIVERSITES OF RAJASTHAN VS. STATE OF RAJANTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2012-10-95] [REFERRED TO]
DR. JIBAN DEBNATH VS. THE STATE OF TRIPURA [LAWS(TRIP)-2016-6-12] [REFERRED TO]
RANU SINGH VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2023-2-183] [REFERRED TO]
GIRIRAJ PRASAD SHARMA VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2023-2-231] [REFERRED TO]
MINOR Y VANDANA VS. COMMISSIONER OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION [LAWS(MAD)-2012-9-1] [REFERRED TO]
NEELAM DEVI VS. HARYANA NURSES REGISTRATION COUNCIL [LAWS(P&H)-2010-2-182] [REFERRED TO]
R. BALAKRISHNAN AND ORS. VS. THE JOINT SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA AND ORS. [LAWS(MAD)-2015-9-90] [REFERRED TO]
MINOR S ASWIN KUMAR VS. STATE OF TAMIL NADU [LAWS(MAD)-2007-4-389] [REFERRED TO]
ADESH UNIVERSITY VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [LAWS(P&H)-2014-5-281] [REFERRED TO]
VED PRAKASH SHARMA VS. STATE OF M P [LAWS(MPH)-2011-1-21] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF KARNATAKA VS. STATE OF MEGHALAYA [LAWS(SC)-2022-3-73] [REFERRED TO]
SIKKIM MANIPAL UNIVERSITY VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(SIK)-2020-1-1] [REFERRED TO]
RAI UNIVERSITY VS. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH [LAWS(SC)-2005-9-21] [REFERRED TO]
HARISH KUMAR VS. STATE OF HARYANA [LAWS(P&H)-2010-2-467] [REFERRED]
SUJITH KUMAR K.V. VS. VINOD M.S [LAWS(KER)-2020-12-422] [REFERRED TO]
Dr. Maheshwar Tiwary VS. State of Jharkhand through Principal Secretary, Human Resource Development Department, Ranchi [LAWS(JHAR)-2011-1-106] [REFERRED TO]
PADMINI A K VS. STATE OF KERALA [LAWS(KER)-2009-10-2] [REFERRED TO]
PUNAL KUMAR DAS VS. STATE OF ASSAM [LAWS(GAU)-2014-3-22] [REFERRED TO]
KHURSHEED AHMAD SHEIKH & ORS. VS. STATE & ORS. [LAWS(J&K)-2012-6-31] [REFERRED]
UPENDRA NARAIN SINGH VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2006-8-14] [REFERRED TO]
ASRAR AHMAD VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2005-8-190] [REFERRED TO]
INDRAWATI DEVI VS. STATE OF U P AND OTHERS [LAWS(ALL)-2011-10-248] [REFERRED TO]
AKHTAR ALI ANSARI AND ORS. VS. STATE OF U.P. AND ORS. [LAWS(ALL)-2015-8-86] [REFERRED TO]
VIJAY C PULJAL VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2005-9-100] [REFERRED TO]
SURESH PATILKHEDE VS. CHANCELLOR UNIVERSITY OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2012-5-89] [REFERRED TO]
J SOMANNA VS. REGISTRAR OSMANIA UNIVERSITY [LAWS(APH)-2008-9-99] [REFERRED TO]
HARIVANSH LAL SRIVASTAVA VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2014-8-298] [REFERRED TO]
TIAMONGLA VS. STATE OF NAGALAND [LAWS(GAU)-2022-7-88] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

G.P.MATHUR, J. - (1.)PROFESSOR Yashpal, an eminent Scientist and former Chairman of University Grants Commission, has filed writ petition no. 19 of 2004 under Article 32 of the Constitution by way of public interest litigation for declaring certain provisions of The Chhattisgarh Niji Kshetra Vishwavidyalaya (Sthapana Aur Viniyaman) Adhiniyam, 2002 as ultra vires and for quashing of the notifications issued by State of Chhattisgarh in the purported exercise of power conferred by Section 5 of the said Adhiniyam for establishing various universities.. The other petitioner who has joined in the petition, is a resident of Chhattisgarh and is concerned with the quality of education in his State. The respondent no.1 to the petition is the State of Chhattisgarh, respondent no.2 is the University Grants Commission and respondent nos.3 to 94 are the private universities which have been established by the State of Chhattisgarh under the aforesaid Adhiniyam.
(2.)THE Chhattisgarh Legislature enacted the Chhattisgarh Niji Kshetra Vishwavidyalaya (Sthapana Aur Viniyaman) Adhiniyam, 2002 (for short 'the Act) which was published in the Gazette on 4.2.2002 to establish self-financed private universities for higher education. Under Section 5 of the Act the State has been empowered to incorporate and establish a university by issuing a notification in the Gazette and Section 6 permits such university to affiliate any college or other institution or to set up more than one campus with the prior approval of the State Government. THE main averments in the petition are that after coming into force of the Act, the State Government has been, simply by issuing notifications in the Gazette, establishing universities in an indiscriminate and mechanical manner without having slightest regard to the availability of any infrastructure, teaching facility or their financial resources. In a short span of about one year as many as 112 universities were established and many of them had absolutely no buildings or campus and were running from one room tenements. THEre was absolutely no regulation or supervision over them. THE legislation has been enacted in a manner which has-com-pletely done away with any kind of control of University Grants Commission (for short 'UGC') over these private universities. THE guidelines issued by UGC on the courses being taught and award of academic degrees has been given a complete go-by. THE universities issued brochures for award of all kinds of degrees like "Member of the International Institute of Medical Sciences", "Fellow of the International Institute of Medical Sciences" and many other similar degrees. THE universities are wholly incapable of imparting any education much less a quality education in absence of basic infrastructure like classrooms, libraries, laboratories or campus. Nevertheless by conferment of a legal status of a university, they have been empowered to award degrees. THE private universities are running professional courses without taking prior permission from regulatory bodies such as All India Council of Technical Education (AICTE), Medical Council of India (MCI), Dental Council of India (DCI), etc. THE requirement of obtaining prior permission from the regulatory bodies has not been followed and the universities are not under the control of any authority and are at liberty to grant degrees, diplomas and certificates to gullible students. THE State Government has not done any verification or checking of universities after issuance of notification in the Gazette, whether they fulfill any norms laid down by the statutory bodies, which is essential for recognition of the degrees, diplomas and certificates awarded by such universities. In absence of requisite permission from the statutory bodies, the degrees and certificates awarded by such universities would not be recognized by the professional organizations, as a result whereof the students studying in such universities and obtaining the degrees therefrom would suffer immense loss, both in terms of money and also the time spent in completing the courses. It is further averred that the University Grants Commission Act is made nugatory as private universities are offering courses without subscribing to the standards laid down by the UGC and there being no homogeneity of the course content, the degree awarded may not be of any value. THE private universities are offering unheard of courses and degrees which are not part of schedule to the UGC Act, which is in clear violation of Section 22 of the aforesaid Act and the Schedule appended thereto. THE minimum requirement of teaching staff as laid down in the guidelines of UGC had also been given a complete go-by. Young students are being misled in enrolling themselves in courses which do not have any substantive content and the degrees offered by such private universities would affect the standard of education at large which in turn will jeopardize the educational system of the whole country and not that of State of Chhattisgarh alone.
Some photographs have also been filed which show that a signboard mentioning the name of the university is put over small room or shop on first or second floor in some congested market area. That they are functioning from small premises which are sometimes a single small room in a commercial complex or a small tenement on the first or second floor of a building or an ordinary flat or MIG house is evident from their address and a few of them are being reproduced below by way of illustration : Respondent No.3 : Thamath University, Raipur Room No.201, llnd Floor Raipur Commercial Complex Jairam Complex, Raipur. Respondent No. 13 : I.I.L.M. University Mishr Bhawan, 1st Floor Tatyapara, Raipur. Respondent No.36 : Supreme University M.I.G. 6, Sector 3 Shankar Nagar, Raipur. Respondent No.37 : E.M.P.I. University C- 9-12, 1st Floor Ekatam Prishar Rajbandha Maidan, Raipur. Respondent No.42 : Jaipuria University, Raipur 1st Floor, Mishr Bhawan, Raipur. Several such universities are functioning outside the State of Chhattisgarh, and their addresses as given below demonstrate the said fact: Respondent No.7 : N.I.I.L.M. University 11/ 66, Shershah Suri Marg Mohan Co-operative Industrial Estate, New Delhi. Respondent No.9 : Lovely University Lovely Auto Complex Dr. Ambedkar Chowk Jalandhar City. Respondent No.10 : Babu Banarasi Dass University Babu Banarasi Dass Northern Indian Foundation Upper Ground Floor, 338-384, S- Block New Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi. Respondent No.12: Dr. Zakir Hussain National University Unopcharik av Anvrat Shikshan Sansthan Satellite Centre, Bailey Road Patna. Respondent No.45: Bio-Informatics, Bio- Tech, and Life Science University, Raipur Bio-Informatic Institute of India B-5, Sector 3 Noida. Respondent No.46: Institute of Business Administration (N.C.D. Office) Ground Floor E-382, Greater Kailash Part II New Delhi. Respondent No. 53: Adarsh University of Science and Technology, Chhattisgarh, N.I.C.I. Society, 54, Todarmal Road Bengali Market New Delhi.

Writ petition (Civil) No. 565 of 2003 has been filed by Gopal Ji Agarwal with the same prayer, namely, that the Chhattisgarh Niji Kshetra Vishwavidyalaya {Sthapana Aur Viniyaman) Adhiniyam 2002 be declared as ultra vires being violative of Constitution of India, and also contrary to the provisions of University Grants Commission Act, 1956, Indian Medical Council Act, 1956, All India Council for Technical Education Act, 1987 and Bar Council of India Act, 1956. A further prayer has been made that a writ of prohibition may be issued restraining the private universities incorporated under the aforesaid Act from imparting any education and conferring any degrees or diplomas. The averments made in the writ petition are substantially the same as made in the writ petition filed by Prof. Yash Pal, that a large number of universities have been incorporated by merely issuing gazette notifications though they do not have any kind of infrastructure or teaching facility and are functioning from one room tenement in a second or third floor in a residential or commercial building and without any teaching staff. The universities have been established merely to confer degrees and they have on their own created a large number of degrees and diplomas which are totally unheard of. The universities had issued advertisements for opening up study centres in different parts of the country for award of any number of degrees and diplomas. By way of illustration, copies of advertisements issued by some of the universities have been filed. One of such university, namely, the Indian University, issued an advertisement inviting applications for Nodal Service Centres/ University Centres for awarding the following kind of degrees and diplomas: JUDGEMENT_165_JT2_2005Html1.htm The writ petitioner, not knowing the correct facts, responded for opening up a study centre and he was asked to deposit Rs. 50,0007- which he did by two Demand Drafts. On enquiry regarding prior permission from Medical Council of India, the Registrar of the Indian University issued a certificate which reads as under:

" Certified that following PARA MEDICAL COURSES are approved by INDIAN UNIVERSITY, RAIPUR. 1) BPT -2 Year 2) Bachelor of Ophthalmology - 2 Year 3) B M L T - 4 Year 4) PG Diploma in Imaging (MR!) 1 Year It is further certified that for Para Medical Course MCI approval is not required and it is not covered by MCI also."
It is further averred that the Indian University, Raipur also issued an advertisement inviting applications for admission to certain types of technical courses in its alleged campus at Graduate School of Business and Administration, Greater Noida, which is in the district of Gautam Budh Nagar, in the State of UP and it was mentioned therein that the candidates may apply to the Registrar by sending a Bank Draft of Rs. 800/-. A photocopy of the advertisement has been filed. It has thus been submitted that though the private universities have no infrastructure for imparting any kind of education, they were alluring people all over the country to open study centres for which they were charging huge amount and also befooling students to apply for admission to wholly unknown and unheard of technical, medical and other professional courses which are not recognized by any statutory authority, and thereby a substantial amount of money has been collected.
(3.)IN a stereotyped manner Gazette notifications were issued notifying a university and by way of illustration one such notification is being reproduced below :
"Raipur, the 11th October, 2002 No. F. 679//02. IN exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of Section 5 of the Chhattisgarh Niji Kshetra Vishwavidyalaya (Sthapana Aur Viniyaman), Adhiniyam, 2002 (No. 2 of 2002) for extension of Higher/Technical Education in Chhattisgarh, hereby, establishes a university known as "INdian Universityi, Raipur" with effect from the date of publication of this notification in the Chhattisgarh Gazette and the jurisdiction of the University shall extend over whole of Chhattisgarh. 2. The Head Office of the University shall be at Raipur. 3. The State Government, hereby authorizes "INdian University, Raipur" to conduct the syllabus and to grant degree or diplomas for which it shall be recognized or authorized as may be required under any other law for the time being in force."

Several legal issues have also been raised in the writ petitions and the principal being that the manner in which these private universities are functioning would result in creating a complete chaos in the system of higher education in the country and the expert bodies created by the Central Government like, University Grants Commission, Medical Council of India, All India Council for Technical Education etc. for coordination and determination of standards in their own respective fields would not be able to perform their statutory duty and would make their functioning not only difficult but almost impossible.



Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.