- (1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.
(2.) This is a matter relating to the establishment of National Law University namely National University of Study and Research in Law. The Chief Minister himself was party in foundation stone laying ceremony in the month of April, 2011 and possession of land has been handed over by the State Government to the National Law University. The construction started, several objections were effectively met with the State and thereafter, repeatedly various assurances were given that the National University of Study and Research in Law in Ranchi will be established so as to give benefit to the students of the State of Jharkhand as the said university has provided 50% reservation of the seats for the students of the Jharkhand. Several objections of the erstwhile khatedar/land holders were already considered and rejected because of the stand taken by the State Government time to time and some of the orders may have been challenged before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and were upheld and the work progressed on the site. The students were already admitted before delivery of possession of the land to the National Law University and it was projected that a new building will be constructed for the National Law University as the National Law University was paying huge rent for the building in which it was running its campus and the hostel. For about two years, the Government fully supported for establishment of the National Law University and gave L 50 crores also and that allocation of fund was prior to filing of this Public Interest Litigation. The first batch of the students already appeared in the examination and results declared. The university has already been affiliated to the Central Examination System of the nation for selection of the candidates in National Law University (CLAT). The university is now admitting the students through CLAT. The process of admission for the second session already completed and new students have already been admitted. Before this Court, on several occasions, the State Government shows its willingness to give the funds as early as possible and those undertakings of the State have been recorded in various orders. After the brilliant students have chosen to take admission in this new National Law University in the State of Jharkhand at Ranchi, all of a sudden, some of the State officials, taking advantage of the situation, trying to become very wise and, therefore, without informing the Court, unilaterally declared that allocation of L 50 crores to the National Law University was one time grant and that has been paid to the university. Such was never the stand before this Court on various occasions, which is apparent from the various previous orders in which stand of the State has been recorded that they will try to release the funds as early as possible. On 06.03.2013, the university again submitted before this Court that respondents are not releasing sufficient fund to the university and that too, during the midst of the construction for which work order has been awarded to C.P.W.D. which is a Central Government Construction Department and not a private contractor. We again reiterated in order dated 06.03.2013 that construction should not be delayed because of paucity of fund as the work cannot be stopped at this juncture. We directed to take a decision expeditiously. Facts relating to the funding was recorded in the order dated 22.04.2013 and it was submitted before this Court that after receiving the utilization certificate, it will be reviewed by the concerned authorities of the State and decision regarding release of further amount shall be taken at the Government level without any delay. Again time was granted to the State Government till 08.05.2013 to look into the matter. On 08.05.2013 it was again pointed out that 50% seats are reserved for the students of the State of Jharkhand. On 12.06.2013 this Court directed the Secretary, Human Resource Department and Secretary, Finance Department, Government of Jharkhand to work out the total cost required to be borne by the State Government and for that purpose both parties may sit together and decide the issue. As per learned counsel for the petitioner, after this order, a meeting was convened on 25.06.2013 and as per the resolution of that meeting, it has been resolved that in view of the resolution dated 25.06.2013, the matter is required to be examine at higher level. This fact has been taken taken note of in order dated 04.07.2013 and then this Court observed that today there is no explanation as to what decision has been taken by the State Government and if the decision was required to be taken by the State Government, why the State Government has not taken decision as yet. The Secretary, Human Resource Department and the Secretary, Finance Department, Government of Jharkhand were directed to remain present in Court on 12thth July, 2013. On 12thth July, 2013, both the Secretaries appeared and it was submitted that the request of the university was again placed before the Advisor to His Excellency the Governor and Chief Secretary but the same was not found favour. On that day, learned Additional Advocate General submitted that every possible ways and means to deal with the situation shall be placed on record by filing an affidavit for that purpose.
(3.) Today affidavit has been filed by one Dhirendra Nath Ojha, Director, Higher Education and it is stated in para 5 that Director, Higher Education vide his letter No. 1078 dated 08.07.2013 informed the O.S.D. of the Advisor of His Excellency the Governor of Jharkhand, Personal Secretary to Principal Secretary, Cabinet Secretariat and Co-ordination Department, Jharkhand about the action taken in the matter. Copy of this communication is placed on record in affidavit filed today dated 29.07.2013. In this communication (Annexure- A), the facts have been mentioned regarding the decision dated 08.05.2013 by which it was decided that no more funding will be there as L 50 crores was one time grant to the university. Then this fact has been taken note of that this Court has passed the order dated 12.06.2013 and then in response to that, a meeting was convened on 25.06.2013. Then this fact has been taken note of that this Court on 12.07.2013 directed to decide the matter and to come with a decision in Court and the above two Secretaries were directed to remain present in the Court. Then in para 7 it is stated that in view of the order dated 04.07.2013 the decision taken in the meeting dated 25.06.2013 and file was sent to the Advisor to His Excellency the Governor of Jharkhand for action on 09.07.2013 for higher level decision and the Advisor sent the file to the Chief Secretary for his opinion. In para 8 it is stated that the Chief mgeksaning thereby, in spite of directions of this Court which were passed after hearing the counsel for the State and keeping in mind the stand of the State that the decision will be reviewed and will be sorted out, unilateral decision was taken by the Chief Secretary that in view of the Advisory Council's decision dated 08.05.2013, the Government will not even ex- amine the issue .;