# Chairman, Sri Gopi chand College of Pharmacy & Management Aahera, Baghpat, U.P. and another v. Pankaj Kumar and others Opp. parties

- **Citation:** (2002) 3 ILRA 797
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2002-09-10
- **Case number:** Special Appeal No. 207 of 2002
- **Bench:** S.K. Sen, C.J. R.K. Agarwal
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/chairman-sri-gopi-chand-college-of-pharmacy-management-aahera-baghpat-u-p-and-40001
- **Pages:** 6

## Headnote

Sri V.M. Zaidi
Sri Anurag Khanna
Smt. Aanita Tripathi

U.P.
State
Universities
Act.-1973-
Section 13- Power of Vice Chancellor- to
transfer
the
students
from
one
institution to another - duly affiliated to
the
concern
university-
B.
Pharma
students after facing UP SEAT 1999-
allotted
the
Gopichand
College
of
Pharmacy and management Baghpat-
due to mismanagement on agitation
pursuant to enquiry conducted by the
District
Magistrate-
in
Tripartite
meeting- the Vice Chancellor transferred
all these students from the institution in
question to K.N. Modi College- held-
proper the parties can not reseind from
their stand who participated in Tripartite
meeting-
direction
issued
to
give
admission in transferred college.

Held - para 9

In this view of the matter the objection
raised by Dr. Padia that the Vice
Chancellor, Ch. Charan Singh University,
Meerut, was not at all authorized to
order transfer of the respondents- writ
petitioners from the appellants college to
another college cannot be sustained as
he could exercise such a power under
section 13 of the U.P. State University
Act

## Text

http://www.allahabadhighcourt.nic.in
3 All] Chairman, S.G.C.College of Pharmacy & Management & anr. V. Pankaj Kumar & ors 797
above provide safeguards, both, to the
state against the evasion of tax and as also
to be bonafied owner or operator to
surrender the vehicle by following the
procedure under section 12 of the Act
read with Rule 22 of the Rules to claim
and obtain a certificate of non user from
the Prescribed Authority and thereby to be
relieved from payment of tax or additional
tax. Accordingly the legislation imposing
tax or additional taxes does not become
arbitrary or ultra vires. The decision relied
upon by the writ petitioners, in our view,
do not really assist them. The reasons
assigned by learned Advocate General in
his
submissions
distinguishing
the
decisions cited by learned counsel for the
writ petitioners, in our view, cannot be
said to be without any substance.

18. Considering the facts and
circumstances of the case, we do not find
any merit in the writ petitions. The writ
petitions
accordingly
fail
and
are
dismissed. Interim order, if any stand
vacated.
---------
APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 10.9.2002

BEFORE
THE HON'BLE S.K. SEN, C.J.
THE HON'BLE R.K. AGARWAL, J.

Special Appeal No. 207 of 2002

Chairman, Sri Gopi chand College of
Pharmacy
&
Management
Aahera,
Baghpat, U.P. and another ...Appellants
Versus
Pankaj Kumar and others ...Opp. parties

Counsel for the Appellants:
Dr. R.G. Padia
Sri Prakash Padia

Counsel for the Respondents:
Sri V.M. Zaidi
Sri Anurag Khanna
Smt. Aanita Tripathi

U.P.
State
Universities
Act.-1973-
Section 13- Power of Vice Chancellor- to
transfer
the
students
from
one
institution to another - duly affiliated to
the
concern
university-
B.
Pharma
students after facing UP SEAT 1999-
allotted
the
Gopichand
College
of
Pharmacy and management Baghpat-
due to mismanagement on agitation
pursuant to enquiry conducted by the
District
Magistrate-
in
Tripartite
meeting- the Vice Chancellor transferred
all these students from the institution in
question to K.N. Modi College- held-
proper the parties can not reseind from
their stand who participated in Tripartite
meeting-
direction
issued
to
give
admission in transferred college.

Held - para 9

In this view of the matter the objection
raised by Dr. Padia that the Vice
Chancellor, Ch. Charan Singh University,
Meerut, was not at all authorized to
order transfer of the respondents- writ
petitioners from the appellants college to
another college cannot be sustained as
he could exercise such a power under
section 13 of the U.P. State University
Act
1973.
Moreover,
the
State
Government was conscious of the fact
that it had no jurisdiction to order
transfer of students of B. Pharma II year
Course from one college to another, as
they were admitted prior to the coming
into force of U.P. Technical University Act
2000 and that is why it had issued
directions for transfer of the students of
B. Pharma Ist year course from one
college to another college. It is seen
from the order dated 31.5.2001, that the
Chairman and the Director of both the
colleges were present in the meeting
held by the Vice Chancellor, Ch. Charan
Singh University, Meerut and they had
agreed to the proposal of transfer of
http://www.allahabadhighcourt.nic.in
798 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES [2002
these
respondents-
writ
petitioners.
Thus, the appellants, who were party to
the
proceedings
before
the
Vice
Chancellor, which culminated into the
order dated 31.5.01 cannot be permitted
to resile.

(Delivered by Hon'ble R.K. Agarwal, J.)

1. The present special appeal has
been filed by the Chairman and the
Principal of Sri Gopichand College of
Pharmacy & Management, Ahera, district
Baghpat, challenging the judgment and
order dated 7.2.2002 passed by the
learned Single Judge in Civil Misc. Writ
Petition No. 24130 of 2001, whereby the
writ petition filed by respondent nos. 1 to
15 has been allowed and a writ of
mandamus was issued to the respondent
nos. 2 to 4 i.e. the present appellants and
the Chairman of Ram Ish Institute, Noida,
district Ghaziabad to comply with the
order of the Vice Chancellor dated
31.5.2001 within a period of three weeks.

Briefly stated the facts giving rise to
the present special appeal are as follows:

2. According to the respondents-
writ petitioners, they have appeared in the
Uttar
Pradesh
State
Engineering
Admission Test 1999 (in short U.P.
SEAT-99) for getting admission in B.
Pharma Ist year course conducted by the
Institute of Engineering and Technology,
U.P., Lucknow. They qualified in the said
admission test and were allotted free sets.
The admission committee allotted them
Sri Gopichand College of Pharmacy &
Management, Baghpat (hereafter referred
to as the Baghpat College). According to
the respondents-writ petitioners after
depositing the requisite amount relating to
admission fee, examination fee and other
expenses, they were granted admission in
the said college. It may be mentioned here
that at the time when the admissions were
granted
to
the
respondents-
writ
petitioners, the Baghpat College was
affiliated
with
Ch.
Charan
Singh
University, Meerut. It is alleged that after
getting admissions, they were being
harassed by the college authorities. They
completed Ist year B. Pharma course and
appeared in the examination. The students
for the year 1999-2000 and 2000-01 took
recourse to the path of agitation against
the mis-management and harassment
meted out to them . They made
complaints to the Vice Chancellor, Ch.
Charan Singh University, Meerut, as also
to the State Government. It appears that
on
the
basis
of
the
complaints/representations made by the
petitioners, the State Government directed
the District Magistrate, Baghpat to hold
an enquiry in the matter, who submitted
his report. On the basis of the said report,
the State Government directed to transfer
those students of Ist year B. Pharma
course of the Baghpat College to other
institutions according to the options given
by the students in accordance with merit
on the basis of the marks obtained in the
first
year
examination.
The
State
Government further gave instructions for
giving protection to the students. A
tripartite meeting was held by the Vice
Chancellor
of
Ch.
Charan
Singh
University on 31.5.2001 in which the
Chairman
and Director of Baghpat
college and Ram Ish Institute, Noida,
(hereinafter referred to as the Noida
Institute)
participated
and
it
was
unanimously decided that 18 students of
B.Pharma IInd years studying in the
Baghpt College be transferred to the
Noida Institute. The respondents-writ
petitioners approached the Noida Institute
for admission, but were not granted any
http://www.allahabadhighcourt.nic.in
3 All] Chairman, S.G.C.College of Pharmacy & Management & anr. V. Pankaj Kumar & ors 799
admission.
The
respondents-writ
petitioners also approached the Baghpat
College for issuing transfer certificate/No
objection certificate, but they were not
issued. Faced with this situation the
respondents-writ petitioners approached
this Court under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India by means of a writ
petition.

3. In the counter affidavit filed in the
writ petition on behalf of the Baghpat
College, a plea was taken that all these
respondents- writ petitioners have been
admitted on payment seats and they have
not paid the full amount of fee. Further,
inter-institutional transfer of Ist year
students have been banned by the State
Government vide Government order dated
13.12.1991.

4. The learned Single Judge by
means of impugned judgment held that
the order dated 31.5.2001 passed by the
Vice
Chancellor
by
which
the
respondents-writ petitioners have been
transferred to Noida Institute has not been
challenged by the college in any forum,
therefore, this order is binding on them.
The plea of admission made on payment
seat was not accepted on the ground that
the Baghpat College has not produced any
material to show that the respondents-
writ petitioners have been admitted on
payment seats and the admission letter
issued by the college authority did not
make any mention as to whether the
admissions have been made on payment
seats or free seats and thus, it was held
that the admissions were made on free
seats. Accordingly, the learned Single
Judge allowed the writ petition and issued
a writ of mandamus to the Chairman and
Principal of the Baghpat College as also
the Chairman and Principal of the Noida
Institute to comply with the order of the
Vice Chancellor dated 31.5.2001. The
said order is under challenge in the
present special appeal.

5. We have heard Dr. R.G. Padia,
learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri
Prakash Padia for the appellants and Sri
V.M. Zaidi, learned counsel appearing on
behalf the respondents-writ petitioners.

6. Learned counsel for the appellants
submitted that the writ petition itself was
not maintainable as there was no existing
cause of action and there was no legal
provision, which could be said to have
been violated. In any event in view of the
Government order dated 13.12.1991,
which had put a complete ban on interinstitutional
transfer
in
respect
of
technical education at degree level, the
respondents writ petitioners cannot claim
any transfer from the Appellants' college
to the Noida Institute. He further
submitted that the Vice Chancellor, Ch.
Charan Singh University, Meerut, had no
jurisdiction to pass any order directing the
transfer
of
the
respondents-
writ
petitioners from the appellant's college to
another college in exercise of powers
under
section
13
of
U.P.
State
Universities Act, 1973. According to him
the U.P. Technical Universities Act 2000
has been enacted and has come into
existence on 8.5.2000 and thus, the Vice
Chancellor, Ch. Charan Singh University
had no jurisdiction to pass any order after
26.7.2000 when section 4 of the said Act
was enforced. Dr. Padia further submitted
that all the respondent-writ petitioners
were admitted on payment seats and as
they have not deposited the full fee, they
cannot be transferred and they are not
entitled for transfer.
http://www.allahabadhighcourt.nic.in
800 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES [2002
7. Sri V.M. Zaidi, learned counsel
for the respondents- writ petitioners,
however
submitted
that
all
the
respondents- writ petitioners have been
admitted against free seats in the Baghpat
College
pursuant
to
the
entrance
examination held in the year 1999 i.e. UP
SEAT 1999. At that time the said college
was affiliated to Ch. Charan Singh
University, Meerut. He further submitted
that because of lack of infrastructural
facilities and the harassing attitude of the
college authorities, the students of B.
Pharma Part -I and Part-II, who were
studying in the said college started
agitation,
whereupon,
the
State
Government
entrusted
the
District
Magistrate to hold an enquiry and submit
his report. Acting on the basis of the said
report,
the
State
Government
itself
transferred all the students of B.Pharma
Ist year Course, who were admitted
pursuant to U.P. Seat 2000 admission to
K.N.Modi Institute of Pharmaceutical &
Research, Modinagar, vide order dated
29.5.2001 and since the respondents - writ
petitioners were admitted pursuant to the
admission test of U.P. SEAT-1999 when
U.P. Technical University Act 2000 was
in force, the Vice Chancellor, Ch. Charan
Singh University, Meerut, in a tripartite
meeting in which the Chairman and
Director of both the Colleges have agreed
for transfer, passed an order transferring
the respondents- writ petitioners. He
further
submitted
that
the
Vice
Chancellor, Ch. Charan Singh University,
Meerut was thus, fully justified in
ordering transfer of the respondents-writ
petitioners from the Baghpat College the
Noida Institute. He further submitted that
the Government order dated 13.12.1991 is
not at all applicable in the present case,
inasmuch as, the said Government order
specifically related to certain colleges in
which the present two colleges have not
been mentioned. According to him the
Vice Chancellor was perfectly well within
his jurisdiction to exercise his power
under
section
13
of
U.P.
State
Universities Act, 1972 and the provisions
of the U.P. Technical University Act,
2000 is not applicable to the respondents-
writ petitioners, who were pursuing their
studies in the technical institution in any
other college or institutions, which were
existing
on
the
date
of
commencement/enforcement of the Act.
He specifically referred to section 4 of
U.P. Technical University Act, 2000.
Lastly, he submitted that the Chairman
and Director of both the colleges having
given their consent in the meeting held on
31.5.2001 for transfer of the respondents-
writ petitioners are estopped from taking
altogether a different stand.

According to Sri V.M. Zaidi, all the
respondents have been admitted on free
seats and not on payment seats.

8. Having heard the learned counsel
for the parties, I find that the plea of the
applicability of the provisions of U.P.
Technical University Act 2000, was not
raised by the appellants before the learned
Single Judge. However, since it goes to
the root of the matter, the provisions of
the said Act has to be examined. Section 4
of the U.P. Technical University Act 2000
reads as follows :

"4. Territorial exercise of Powers-
(1) The University shall, in the exercise
of the powers under this Act, have
jurisdiction over the whole of Uttar
Pradesh.
(2) Every college or institution
other
than
an
existing
college,
imparting technical education in the
http://www.allahabadhighcourt.nic.in
3 All] Chairman, S.G.C.College of Pharmacy & Management & anr. V. Pankaj Kumar & ors 801
State on the date of commencement of
this Act shall, with effect from such
date as may be notified in this behalf by
the State Government, be deemed to be
affiliated to the University established
under Section 3 and shall cease to be
affiliated to or associated with the
University established by or under the
Uttar Pradesh State Universities Act,
1973, hereinafter referred to in this
section as erstwhile University :

Provided that a student pursuing
his study in technical education in any
college
or
institution,
other
than
existing college, on the date of such
commencement, shall be entitled and be
allowed to continue and complete such
study under the erstwhile University
after such commencement and the
erstwhile
University
shall
hold
examination of such student and confer
degree
or
any
other
academic
distinction on him in accordance with
the procedure in force for the time
being in the erstwhile University."

9. From a reading of the aforesaid
provisions it is seen that all those
students, who have been admitted in a
technical course prior to enforcement of
this section are to be governed by the
Universities
to
which
the
said
college/institution is affiliated. It is not in
dispute that all the respondents- writ
petitioners have been admitted in B.
Pharma Ist year course in the Baghpat
College in the year 1999 i.e. prior to
coming into force of the U.P. Technical
University Act 2000, and have been
pursuing
their
studies
in
technical
education in the said college, which
during the relevant period was affiliated
to Ch. Charan Singh University . Thus,
they are excluded from the applicability
of section 4 of the aforesaid Act as their
case squarely falls under the proviso to
section 4 of the said Act. In this view of
the matter the objection raised by Dr.
Padia that the Vice Chancellor, Ch.
Charan Singh University, Meerut, was not
at all authorized to order transfer of the
respondents- writ petitioners from the
appellants college to another college
cannot be sustained as he could exercise
such a power under section 13 of the U.P.
State University Act 1973. Moreover, the
State Government was conscious of the
fact that it had no jurisdiction to order
transfer of students of B. Pharma IInd
year Course from one college to another,
as they were admitted prior to the coming
into force of U.P. Technical University
Act 2000 and that is why it had issued
directions for transfer of the students of B.
Pharma Ist year course from one college
to another college. It is seen from the
order dated 31.5.2001, that the Chairman
and the Director of both the colleges were
present in the meeting held by the Vice
Chancellor, Ch. Charan Singh University,
Meerut and they had agreed to the
proposal of transfer of these respondentswrit petitioners. Thus, the appellants, who
were party to the proceedings before the
Vice Chancellor which culminated into
the order dated 31.5.01, cannot be
permitted to resile.

10. So far as the question as to
whether the respondents -writ petitioners
were admitted on payment seats or on free
seats in the Baghpat college is concerned,
it may be mentioned here that it was a
specific case of the respondents- writ
petitioners that they have been admitted
on free seats whereas the stand taken by
the Baghpat college was that they have
been admitted on payment seats. The
college authorities did not produce any
http://www.allahabadhighcourt.nic.in
802 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES [2002
material before the Court to establish that
the respondents- writ petitioners have
been admitted against payment seats.
From a perusal of the Brochure annexed
with the affidavit filed along with Stay
Vacation Application No. 40367 of 2002
by the respondents- writ petitioners it
appears that a student was required to pay
a total sum of Rs.32,000/- per year for
free seat and Rs.68,000/- against payment
seats. The respondents- writ petitioners
have deposited the amount of fee towards
free seats only. The appellants have not
produced any document to show that the
respondent-writ petitioners have been
admitted against payment seats. The stand
taken by the respondents-writ petitioners
that they have been admitted on free seats
appears to be justified. In this view of the
matter it is held that the Vice Chancellor,
Ch. Charan Singh University, Meerut,
was well within his jurisdiction to order
transfer
of
the
respondents-writ
petitioners from the Baghpat College to
the Noida Institute.

11. In view of the foregoing
discussions,, we do not find any legal
infirmity in the order passed by the
learned Single Judge. The Special appeal
fails and is dismissed.
---------
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 10.9.2002

BEFORE
THE HON'BLE RAKESH TIWARI, J.

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 29111 of 1995

Ex.No.6893825 F Havildar J.S. Bansal

 ...Petitioner
Versus
The Union of India and others

 ...Respondents

Counsel for the Petitioner:
Sri G.D. Mukerji
Sri Satyajit Mukerji

Counsel for the Respondents:
Sri U.N. Sharma
S.C.

Army Regulation 1987- Regulation 377,
378, 379, 381- Desertion-Army Person
proceeded on 10 days leave- during
course of Journey after enjing tea lost
his memory- on 10.7.87- after being
normal approached for joining- refusal
on the pretext no documentary evidence
produced- held illegal- pertinently where
the authorities neither initiated any
proceeding
despite
of
permanent
address of the army men- where after
completing 22 years services- Petition
became entitled for the benefit of
pension and only 7 days remained in
maturity of the claim- cannot be held
guilty of desertion.

Held- Para 12,13 and 14

The petitioner had submitted a petition
dated 31.1.1995 forwarding therewith a
medical
certificate
dated
11.1.1995
issued by Dr. P.K. Sharma, Physician,
District Hospital, Agra stating that he
was suffering from psychiatric problem.
This has been rejected only on the
ground that no documentary proof for
his suffering of the above disability since
November, 1987 has been produced by
the petitioner.

The petitioner was suffering from 1987
loss of memory. He got treatment in
1995 after being find by the family
members in a band of Sadhus, hence
rejection of petition was irrational and
on irrelevant grounds.

From the aforesaid facts, it is established
that the petitioner is not at fault or guilty
of desertion. The respondents have
proceeded in the case of the petitioner
without application of mind in a very