- (1.) Petitioner is an association of Self Financed Colleges, affiliated to M.J.P. Ruhilkhand University, Bareilly and has got itself registered as a society under the Societies Registration Act, 1860. Clause-12 of its bye-laws permits the society to institute legal proceedings on its behalf. It has filed the present writ petition challenging the decision taken by the Executive Council in its meeting dated 2.11.2011 and 27.2.2013, as intimated in the communication/order of the Registrar dated 15.7.2013, insofar as a demand of development fee @ Rs. 500/- per student has been levied from the Self Financed institutions.
(2.) At the very outset, Sri Vivek Verma, learned counsel appearing for the University, has raised a preliminary objection with regard to the maintainability of the writ petition on the ground that petitioner has no locus to maintain the writ petition as it is not a person aggrieved and no student, who alone could have complained, has actually raised an issue and the writ petition, therefore, is liable to be dismissed.
(3.) The petitioner, being a registered society, is a juristic person. It has filed the present writ petition on behalf of its members, which are Self Financed Colleges, affiliated to the respondent university. The representatives of the 12 institutions, details of which have been given in para nos. 4 & 5 of the supplementary affidavit, are the members of the committee of management of the petitioner institution. Sri G.K. Singh, learned Senior Advocate, has also made a statement that member institutions of the petitioner undertake to be bound by the outcome of the present writ proceedings. In view of the above, I am of the opinion that the petitioner association is entitled to maintain the present writ petition on behalf of its member self financed colleges.;