- (1.) In these bunch of fresh writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, common questions of law are involved hence the writ petitions are decided by the present common judgment. Learned Counsel for the parties are agree that the petitions be decided at the admission stage. Sri J.N. Mathur, learned Senior Counsel and Additional Advocate General, appeared for Respondent University and submits that the petitions be decided on substantial question of law involved in these writ petitions and it is not necessary to file response to the allegations on record, which may be looked into by the Respondent University at the time of holding inquiry.
(2.) While assailing the impugned orders dated 14.7.2011, Petitioners counsel submit that the Respondent University has taken a decision to de-affiliate the Petitioners for extraneous reasons. It is also alleged that the Deputy Registrar is holding the charge of the Office and he is managing the affairs of the Respondent University for extraneous consideration and reasons. However, without entering into the mala fide and other factual averments contained in the writ petitions, I leave it open to the Petitioners to raise at appropriate forum in future, as the writ petitions are decided on the pure question of law.
(3.) While assailing the impugned orders, it has been submitted by the Petitioners counsel that no opportunity of hearing was provided to the Petitioners. No any material or document was supplied giving opportunity to rebut those evidence which are the foundation for referring the matter to the State Government for approval to de-affiliate the colleges.;