MAHARISHI MARKANDESHWAR MEDICAL COLLEGE AND HOSPITAL & OTHERS versus STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH & OTHERS

Citation: [2017] 3 S.C.R. 417 · Decided: 28-04-2017 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: DIPAK MISRA · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

cites 3 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

[2017] 3 S.C.R. 417 
MAHARISHI MARKANDESHWAR MEDICAL COLLEGE AND 
A 
HOSPITAL & OTHERS 
v. 
STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH & OTHERS 
(Civil Appeal No. 5198 of2017) 
APRIL 28, 2017 
(DIPAK MISRA, A. M. KHANWILKAR AND 
MOHAN M. SHANTANAGOUDAR, JJ.) 
B 
Himachal Pradesh Private Medical Educational Institutions 
(Regulation of Admission and Fixation of Fee) Act, 2006 (as 
C 
amended) - ss. 3(6), 3(6a) and 3(6b) - Validity of - Writ petition 
seeking direction to strike down ss. 3(6), 3(6a) and 3(6b) as null 
and void - Appellant-private medical colleges case that amendment 
to 2006 Act whereby it became mandatory for all the private medical 
institutions set up in the State to take affiliation from the Himachal 
D 
Pradesh University affected the autonomy of appellant no. 2-
Maharishi Markandeshwar University, an independent and a ful/-
fledged University established under an independent special State 
Legislation - Dismissal of writ petition by the High Court - On 
appeal, held: Appellant no. I-college being a constituent of appellant 
no. 2-University, it cannot be compelled to take affiliation from 
E 
another University-Himachal Pradesh University - Power of 
granting afjlliation to colleges under the control of the concerned 
University, must vest with the respective University to which the 
college will be affiliated - It cannot be whittled down by the 2006 
Act or amendments made thereto - Requirement of affiliation from 
F 
another University even in respect of its constituent college, would 
be striking at the autonomy of the appellant no. 2-University and in 
any case beyond the purview of the subject of admissions and 
fixation of fee for which Act of 2006 has been enac;ted - Section 
3(6a)(as amended), would impinge upon the autonomy of an 
independent University established under a separate State 
G 
Legislation, thus, cannot be sustained as the same are unreasonable, · 
irrational and in conflict with the special State Legislation-2010 
Act, under which appellant no.2-University, is established -
Judgment of High Court is set aside - Maharishi Markandeshwar 
University (Establishment and Regulation) Act, 2010. 
H 
417 
418 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2017] 3 S.C.R. 
A 
Allowing the appeal, the Court 
HELD: 1.1 Since the appellant no.1-College is a constituent 
'Of the appellant no. 2-University, the. question of compelling it to 
take affiliation from another University (Himachal Pradesh 
University) cannot be countenanced. The impugned judgment of 
B the High Court is set aside. Section 3(6a) of the Himachal Pradesh 
Private Medical Educational Institutions (Regulation of 
Admission and Fixation of Fee) Act, 2006, is struck down being 
irrational, unreasonable, ultra vires and unconstitutional. The 
Regulatory Authorities would forthwith proceed in the matter 
without insisting for an affiliation of the appellant no.1-College (a 
C constituent college of Appellant No.2-University) from the 
Himachal Pradesh University. [Paras 26, 27][456-F-H; 457-A) 
1.2 The appellant no. 2-Maharishi Markandeshwar 
University has been established under the Maharishi 
Markandeshwar University (Establishment and Regulation) Act, 
D 2010. The intendment of the 2010 Act is to provide for 
establishment, incorporation and regulation of the appellant no. 
2-University for higher education, to regulate its functioning and 
for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto. The 2010 
Act purports to establish an independent University in the State 
E of Himachal Pradesh, having full autonomy as that of any other 
full-fledged University including the authority to start Multi-
Faculty Education Courses within its campus and also constituent 
colleges off campus. From the legislative scheme of 2010 Act, it 
is axiomatic that an independent, autonomous University has been 
F 
established under this Act. The appellant no. 2-University, thus, 
has all the trappings of a full-fledged University, to not only start 
imparting education in prescribed courses but also to set up its 
constituent colleges to effectuate the purpose for which the 
University has been established. Indubitably, a constituent 
college of the University would be an integral part of the 
G University. [Paras 14-16)(441-A-B; 447-A-B; 450-C-D) 
1.3 Affiliation from University may be a pre-condition for 
starting any college or new courses. The constituent college of 
the appellant no. 2-University would therefore, at best, require 
affiliation from the appellant no. 2. Th

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.