# Bappa Sri Narain Vocational Institute v. State of U.P. & Ors

- **Citation:** (2021) 10 ILRA 903
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2021-10-26
- **Case number:** Misc. Single No. 18588 of 2020
- **Bench:** Vivek Chaudhary
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/bappa-sri-narain-vocational-institute-v-state-of-u-p-ors-46427
- **Pages:** 6

## Headnote

Law
-
Vocational
Institution
-
Starting
new
subjects
by
existing
Vocational Institute in existence before
21.10.2005 - As per G.O. dated 21.10.2005
& 22.12.2016 - for starting new courses,
along with the proposal for the new
course, the applicant college in existence
since prior to Government Order dated
21.10.2005, is required to submit its' no
objection
certificate
along
with
an
affidavit that the land available with the
college since its establishment is still
available with it and the new course
would be run on the said land only - thus
association in a new subject can be
granted to a colleges which are existing
since prior to 21.10.2005, even where
land is neither owned by the parent body
nor by the managing institution colleges &
they are not required to submit any
documents with regard to land along with
their proposal for new courses - Held -
petitioner institution running since 1954
and on the same land new course of
B.Com was started from the year 2008
with temporary association - Held - the
petitioner institution is covered by the
Government Order dated 22.12.2016.

Allowed. (E-5)

## Text

10 All. Bappa Sri Narain Vocational Institute Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
903
appellant was paid excess compensation
under the Act."

12.
In
the present
case,
the
management
has
accepted
respondent
workman to be a regular employee and
competent authority of the management has
passed order regularizing services of the
respondent workman and directed its subordinates to act accordingly. For more than
a decade the sub-ordinate officers did not
act upon the same. There is no reason
placed before this Court for failure to
comply with the orders of the competent
authority. Therefore, order passed by the
Tribunal grants substantial justice and this
Court is not inclined to interfere with the
same.

13. Thus, there is no force in the writ
petition and the same is dismissed.
----------
(2021)10ILR A903
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: LUCKNOW 26.10.2021

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE VIVEK CHAUDHARY, J.

Misc. Single No. 18588 of 2020

Bappa Sri Narain Vocational Institute
 ...Petitioner
Versus
State of U.P. & Ors. ...Respondents

Counsel for the Petitioner:
Lalta Prasad Misra, Prafulla Tiwari

Counsel for the Respondents:
C.S.C., Savitra Vardhan Singh

Civil
Law
-
Vocational
Institution
-
Starting
new
subjects
by
existing
Vocational Institute in existence before
21.10.2005 - As per G.O. dated 21.10.2005
& 22.12.2016 - for starting new courses,
along with the proposal for the new
course, the applicant college in existence
since prior to Government Order dated
21.10.2005, is required to submit its' no
objection
certificate
along
with
an
affidavit that the land available with the
college since its establishment is still
available with it and the new course
would be run on the said land only - thus
association in a new subject can be
granted to a colleges which are existing
since prior to 21.10.2005, even where
land is neither owned by the parent body
nor by the managing institution colleges &
they are not required to submit any
documents with regard to land along with
their proposal for new courses - Held -
petitioner institution running since 1954
and on the same land new course of
B.Com was started from the year 2008
with temporary association - Held - the
petitioner institution is covered by the
Government Order dated 22.12.2016.

Allowed. (E-5)

(Delivered by Hon'ble Vivek Chaudhary, J.)

1. Heard Dr. L.P. Mishra, Assisted by
Sri Prafulla Tiwari, learned counsel for
petitioner, Sri Savitra Vardhan Singh,
learned counsel for respondent Lucknow
University and Mr. Pankaj Khare, learned
Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the
State.

2. Present writ petition is filed by the
Bappa Sri Narain Vocational Institute for
quashing of the order dated 05.08.2020
passed by the Registrar of Lucknow
University
imposing
penalty
of
Rs.1,00,000/-
(One
Lakh)
upon
the
petitioner institution and condition no. 1 of
order dated 10.09.2020 also by Registrar of
Lucknow
University
providing
that
temporary association of the Bappa Sri
Narain Vocational Institute (hereinafter
904 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
referred to as ''petitioner institution') is
being extended as a last opportunity and the
institution shall get a spot inspection
conducted within three months and a report
shall be submitted by 31.12.2020 or its
recognition for the Session 2021-2022 shall
be
automatically
barred.
Further,
mandamus is also sought to declare that the
petitioner
institution
be
declared
as
permanent
associate
college
of
the
University.

3. The facts of the case are that
petitioner no.1 is a society running number
of educational institutions. Initially the
municipal area of the Lucknow city was
governed by Lucknow Improvement Trust
(hereinafter referred to as ''Trust'). For the
purposes of development of education in
the city of Lucknow, the trust executed a
permanent lease deed dated 05.10.1933,
w.e.f. 01.04.1931, in favour of Pt. Jai
Narayan Mishra, the then Secretary and
Manager of Kanya Kubj Inter College
Lucknow. The title area of the land was 31
Bigha, 8 Biswa and 17 Biswansi sitatuated
at Cantonment Road, Lucknow. The said
Kanya Kubj College was one of the
Colleges being run by the petitioner
society. The factum of lease was also later
duly
recognized
by
the
Lucknow
Development Authority by its letter dated
26.09.2009. Pt.
Jai
Narayan
Mishra,
popularly known as ''Kaka Ji' and Shri
Narayan Mishra, popularly known as
''Bappa Ji' were real brothers. In order to
provide education, they established number
of educational institutions on the said lease
land, which are duly recognized, affiliated
and existing till date. Petitioner institution
was initially known as Bappa Sri Narain
Degree College, an associate college of
Lucknow University recognized in the year
1954. Later the college was upgraded to the
post graduate level and named Bappa Sri
Narain Vocational Post Graduate College
an associate college of Lucknow University
recognized in the year 1995-96. For the
purposes of granting association for certain
subjects and for similar other purposes it
was found necessary that area over which
the petitioner institution was initially
established be separately earmarked and
was so done.

4. So far as the present dispute is
concerned,
petitioner
institution
was
initially established as a degree college in
the year 1954 and the Executive Council of
Lucknow University, in its meeting dated
14.05.1954, took a decision to grant it
recognition as an associate college, to run
its courses of Bachelor of Arts. In the year
1962 the College was also granted
recognition for Bachelor of Science. In the
year 1968 additional subjects for both B.A.
and B.Sc. classes were permitted. The
dispute started with the Government Order
dated 21.10.2005, whereby the State
Government laid down the standards for
opening of new degree colleges and
recognition and association for additional
subjects/courses at graduated and post
graduate level in the existing colleges.
Paragraph
2(छ)
and
2(ि)
of
the
Government Order dated 21.10.2005 reads
as under:-

(छ) किसी नये पाठ्यक्रम िो प्रारम्भ
िरने हेिु अनापकि प्रदान किये िाने िे प्रस्ताव
िे समय सम्बस्न्धि/टरस्ट कनिास िे नाम भूकम
अकनवायग रूप से होगी। रािस्व अकधिारी िे
रूप में खिौनी िहसीलदार द्वारा सत्याकपि होगी
ििा प्रस्ताव िे साि खिौनी िी मूल प्रकि िासन
िो संदकभगि िी िायेगी।

(ि) मानिानुसार अपेकक्षि भूकम
प्रस्ताकवि महाकवद्यालय िे नाम रािस्व अकभलेखें
10 All. Bappa Sri Narain Vocational Institute Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
905
में कवकधिः अन्तररि होने पर ही सम्बद्धिा िे
प्रस्ताव पर कवचार किया िायेगा। पैिृि संथिा
अपने नाम िी भूकम िो 30 वर्ग िे पट्टे पर
महाकवद्यालय िो कवकधिः अन्तररि िर सििी है
किन्तु 30 वर्ग से िम िे पट्टे िो मान्य नहीं किया
िायेगा।

5. Thus, the said Government Order
dated 21.10.2005 required that for starting
of new courses, at the time of issuance of
grant of no objection certificate, the
concerned trust/body shall have land in its
own name. The Tehsildar as a Revenue
Officer shall verify the revenue record and
along with proposal the original revenue
record shall be forwarded to the State
Government. As per the prescriptions, the
land proposal shall be considered only after
the proposed land is legally transferred in
the name of proposed institution in the
revenue records. The parent body having
the land in its name may lease the same for
a period of 30 years in the name of the
institution but a lease for less than 30 years
would not be recognized.

6. The petitioner institution also took
a decision to start B.Com course and
applied
for
recognition
of
the
said
additional course. The State Government
vide its letter dated 09.04.2008 granted a no
objection
certificate/Clearance
to
the
petitioner institution for starting B.Com
course under the self finance scheme. The
Executive Council of Lucknow University
in its meeting dated 30.08.2008, after
considering the report of the panel
inspector and clearance granted by the
State
Government,
granted
temporary
association to the petitioner institution for
the academic session 2009-10 for its
B.Com. course also. The said decision of
the Executive Council was communicated
to the Principal of the institution by letter
of the Registrar of Lucknow University
dated 29.12.2008. From the Academic
Session 2010-11 up to the Academic
Session 2018-19 every year the said
temporary association was duly extended.

7. Looking into the fact that large
number of old institutions were running
since long on the basis of earlier settled
rights and title of different nature with
regard to their land, and difficulty being
suffered
by
them
from
the
strict
prescription made by Government Order
dated 21.10.2005, the State Government
issued another Government order dated
22.12.2016 modifying/substituting some of
the conditions of the earlier issued
Government Order dated 21.10.2005. The
said substitution also included the condition
2(छ) and 2(ि) and after amendment new
condition 2(छ) and 2(ि) of Government
Order dated 21.10.2005 read as follows:-

"(छ) किसी नये पाठ्यक्रम िो प्रारम्भ
िरने हेिु अनापकि प्रदान किये िाने िे प्रस्ताव
पर भूकम से सम्बस्न्धि अकभलेख िी आवश्किा
नही होगी। नये पाठ्यक्रम िे प्रस्ताव िे साि
आवेदि िो महाकवद्यालय प्रारम्भ िरने हेिु
प्राप्त अनापकि प्रमाण पत्र िे साि इस आिय
िा िपि संलग्न िरना होगा कि महाकवद्यालय
प्रारम्भ िरिे समय उपलब्ध भूकम विगमान में
उपलब्ध है, और उसी भूकम पर नया पाठ्यक्रम
संचाकलि किया िायेगा।

(ि) मानिानुसार अपेकक्षि भूकम
प्रस्ताकवि
महाकवद्यालय
िे
नाम
रािस्य
अकभलेखों में कवकधिः अन्तररि होने पर ही
सम्बद्धिा िे प्रस्ताव पर कवचार किया िायेगा।
पैकत्रि संख्या अपने नाम िी भूकम िो 30 वर्ग िे
पट्टे पर महाकवद्यालय िो कवकधिः अन्तररि िर
सििी है किन्तु 30 वर्ग से िम िे पट्टे िो मान्य
नही किया िायेगा। यह प्राकवधान िासनादेि
906 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
कदनांि 21-10-2005 िे पूवग से संचाकलि
महाकवद्यालयो में नये पाठ्यक्रमों िी सम्बद्धिा
िे प्रस्ताव पर लागू नहीं होगा।"

8.

The
amendment
made
by
Government Order dated 22.12.2016 now
provided that for starting new courses,
existing colleges are not required to submit
the land related documents. The institutions
are only required to submit a no objection
certificate, with a declaration on an
affidavit that the land available at the time
of starting of the institution is still available
with the institution and the new course
shall be run on the said land only.
Condition 2(ि) specifically provided that
the conditions with regard to 30 years lease
in favour of the institution would not be
applicable with regard to the recognition
and association of new courses to be run by
the institutions already in existence since
before
coming
into
force
of
the
Government Order dated 21.10.2005.

9. When petitioner institution
applied for extension of association for
its' B.Com course, which was due to
expire after Academic Session 2018-19, a
letter dated 18.03.2018 was issued by the
University to the petitioner institution
intimating it that a committee has been
constituted
for
inspection
of
the
institution for submitting its report for
grant of permanent association. The said
committee conducted an inspection and
submitted its report dated 22.06.2018
making its recommendation in favour of
the
petitioner
institution.
The
said
committee, in its recommendations, also
specifically
stated
that
petitioner
institution is an old institution running
since 1954. It further noted the status of
the
land
and
also
that
petitioner
institution is covered by the Government
Order dated 22.12.2016.

10. By letter dated 07.09.2019 the
Registrar of the Lucknow University
sought
clarification
from
the
State
Government on the issue, as to whether, in
view of the Government Order dated
22.12.2016, association in a new subject
can be granted to a college where land is
neither owned by the parent body nor by
the managing institution. On 08.08.2019 a
letter was sent by the University to the
petitioner institution also, informing it that
University has sought clarification from the
State Government. Ignoring the said
clarification sought by the University from
the State Government, by impugned order
dated
05.08.2020
a
penalty
of
Rs.
1,00,000/- (One Lakh) was imposed upon
the petitioner institution for delay in getting
permanent association and impugned order
dated
10.09.2020
was
also
issued
specifying that the temporary association is
being extended for the last time, which are
now challenged by the present writ petition.

11. Learned counsel for the petitioner
submits, that, admittedly the petitioner
institution is running since 1954 and on the
same land new course of B.Com was
started from the year 2008 with temporary
association. Thus, the petitioner institution
is covered by the Government Order dated
22.12.2016. In view thereof, University is
required to take final decision on the
inspection
report
submitted
by
its'
committee. Once the decision was pending
at the end of the University, after all the
formalities on part of the petitioner
institution were completed, neither any
penalty could be imposed upon the
petitioner nor any warning could be given
to it.
10 All. Bappa Sri Narain Vocational Institute Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
907

12. The stand of the University is that
since it is awaiting clarification from the
State Government, it is unable to give
permanent association to the petitioner
institution. It is also submitted on behalf of
the University that petitioner institution had
not taken timely steps for its recognition,
therefore, as per the decision of the
Executive Council, penalty is imposed
upon the institution and it is also warned to
get the needful done forthwith for its
permanent
recognition,
failing
which,
consequences as indicated in the impugned
letter would follow.

13. Learned Standing Counsel was
also asked to seek instructions from the
State Government and he has placed before
this Court the clarification Order dated
20.09.2021, wherein the State Government
has
quoted
condition
2(ि)
of
the
Government Order dated 22.12.2016, and
has provided that Lucknow University is
expected to decide the matter in the light of
the
aforesaid.
Thus,
the
said
State
Government has not issued any specific
clarification but has only quoted the
conditions of earlier Government Order
dated 22.12.2016.

14. In the said circumstances learned
counsels for parties submit that now it is
for this Court to interpret the provisions
applicable upon the petitioner institution.

15.

I
have
considered
the
submissions made by counsels for both
the parties and learned Standing Counsel
and perused the records referred to by
them. There is no dispute that the
petitioner institution is in existence since
before independence. By Government
Order dated 21.10.2005, the Government
had put strict conditions with regard to
the manner in which the ownership of the
land was required to be proved, while
submitting an application for opening of
new colleges or for initiating new
subject/classes in an existing college. The
said Government Order dated 21.10.2005
was modified by the Government Order
dated 22.12.2016. In the present case, the
petitioner institution has applied for
starting of new subjects. Therefore,
present case is covered by condition 2(छ)
and 2(ि) as modified by the Government
Order dated 22.12.2016, which after
modification provides that, along with the
proposal for the new course, the applicant
college in existence since prior to
Government Order dated 21.10.2005, is
required to submit its' no objection
certificate along with an affidavit that the
land available with the college since its
establishment is still available with it and
the new course would be run on the said
land only. Condition 2(ि) also, after it
was
modified
by
the
aforesaid
Government Order dated 22.12.2016,
provided that the new conditions would
not be applicable with regard to starting
of new courses in colleges existing since
before 21.10.2005. Thus, condition 2(छ)
and 2(ि) of Government Order dated
21.10.2005
as
modified
by
the
Government Order dated 22.12.2016 only
require, that, the colleges which are
existing since prior to 21.10.2005 are not
required to submit any documents with
regard to land along with their proposal
for new courses. They are only required
to submit their no objection certificate
and an affidavit that the new course
would be run on the land already
available with the college.

16. Admittedly, petitioner institution
fulfills the said modified conditions of the
Government Order dated 22.12.2016. The
908 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
said fact is also noted by the Inspecting
Committee by its report dated 22.06.2018.
Thus, the University was required to decide
the application of the petitioners' college as
per
the
Government
Order
dated
22.12.2016. The University instead of
deciding the same had referred the matter
to the State Government on 07.09.2019.
Once, the University had referred the
matter to the State Government, it cannot
turn back and say that there is any delay on
part of the college in getting the college
associated permanently within the period of
four year. The college had done everything
at its' end and it was for the University to
take further steps. Therefore, imposition of
penalty of Rs. 1,00,000/- (One Lakh) by
order dated 05.08.2020 upon the college,
for not doing the needful for permanent
association within the period of four years,
cannot stand and is set aside.

17. Similarly, the letter of the
University dated 10.09.2020 by which the
University has given temporary association
only for the session 2020-2021 with the
condition imposed that the same is being
extended for the last time is incorrect. The
said condition that extension is being
extended for that the last time in letter
dated 10.09.2020 is also set aside. The
University will take a final decision on
grant of permanent association to the
petitioner college, in the light of above,
within a period of three months.

18.

In
the
given
facts
and
circumstance of the case, the question as to
whether the University has any right to give
a temporary association or can only give a
permanent association need not be gone
into in the present case and the said
question is left open to the decided in
appropriate case.

19. With the aforesaid, the present
writ petition stands disposed of.
----------
(2021)10ILR A908
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: LUCKNOW 01.10.2021

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE JASPREET SINGH, J.

Misc. Single No. 20786 of 2020

Rajendra Prasad Agrawal & Anr.
 ...Petitioners
Versus
Samarpan Varishtha Jan Parisar & Ors.
 ...Respondents

Counsel for the Petitioners:
Sudeep Kumar, Avdesh Kumar Pandey,
Radhika Verma

Counsel for the Respondents:
C.S.C., Dr. L.P. Misra, J.K. Sinha, Namit
Sharma, Rohit Kumar Verma, Satyanshu
Ojha

Civil Law - Code of Civil Procedure , O.39
R.1, O.39 R.2 - Temporary injunction -
grant of an interim injunction - while
dealing with an application for injunction,
the Court is required to be guided by the
principles of prima facie case, balance of
convenience and irreparable injury - when
the Court is considering an application for
interim injunction, it is not required to
hold a mini trial - Courts should make an
endeavour to test the relevant pleadings
in and if it finds that there is a contestable
issue which requires evidence of the
parties to be decided and the balance of
convenience and irreparable injury is in
favour of the party seeking the injunction,
then the status be preserved, as at that
stage the rights of the parties are in an
incohate stage - Appellate Court ought to
be slow in interfering with the order