Brahmmoorty Tiwari vs Rani Durgawati Vishwavidyalaya

A.M. Khanwilkar, J.

1.By this petition, the petitioners are assailing the decision of respondents-University of enhancing the fee for admission to LL.M. course. The University raised the fees to Rs.10,000/- per semester for granting admission to the said course.

According to the petitioners, the University in the brochure, however, represented that the candidate may have to pay Rs.5,000/- per year. Further, the said change has been effected by the University after the admission process was completed. Thus, the University enhanced the fees from Rs.5,000/- per year to Rs.10,000/- per semester. Besides, this has been done without following due process and that the impugned decision is taken by the Authority not competent in that behalf. These are the basic points urged before us.

In the context of the issues raised in this petition, this Court had directed the University to file affidavit on three specific points vide order dated 20.01.2014. Pursuant to the said order in companion Writ Petition No.17759/2010 (which, today, has been dismissed for default by a separate order), the University has filed further affidavit placing on record relevant information, which addresses the grievance made by the petitioners before us. In paragraphs 1 to 6 of the said affidavit dated 30.01.2014 sworn by the Registrar of the University, which is relevant for our purpose, reads, thus:-

�1. That, the entrance test rules of the LLM course have been formulated as per Ordinance No.23-A. The said Ordinance in paragraph 5 clearly stipulates that the tuition fee for the LLM course will be Rs 10,000 per semester. A copy of the said rules of the L.L.M. entrance examination 2009-10 is being filed as Annexure A-1.

It is pertinent to note that the Petitioner is aware of this Ordinance as well as of the said rules as the Petitioner has signed a declaration wherein the Petitioner has stated that the �petitioner has gone through all the rules given in the form carefully and I shall abide by the existing riles or the rule as declared by the University from time to time.� It is submitted that the petitioner, thereafter on the basis of this declaration has deposited the fees without any protest.

That the University had introduced semester system in the L.L.M course for the first time from academic session 2008-09. Prior to this, the University followed a yearly system in the L.L.M course.

That, a meeting of faculty of law and board of studies of law held on 2.8.08 wherein in light of the change in pattern from yearly system to semester system, certain regulatory changes were also proposed, which included a change in fee schedule of the L.L.M. course in the University. It was decided that the fee for the L.L.M course shall be Rs 10,000 per semester. It may be appropriate to mention at this stage, that the fee for the L.L.M prior to this academic session was Rs 5000 per year. A copy of the minutes of the meeting dated 2.8.08 is being filed herewith as Annexure P- 2.

That, the abovementioned propose for change in fee was approved by the Vice Chancellor under Section 15(4) of the Madhya Pradesh Vishwavidyalaya Adhiniyam, 1973. It is also submitted that on the basis of this proposal, the budget was also prepared keeping in view the increase in fee. This budget was subsequently approved by the Finance Committee of the University in the meeting held on 26.6.09 and by Executive Committee on 13.7.09. A copy of the budget is being filed herewith as Annexure A-3, a copy of the minutes of the meeting dated 26.6.09 is being filed as Annexure A-4 and a copy of the minutes of the meeting dated 13.7.09 is being filed as Annexure A-5.

That, it is clear from the aforementioned facts that the fee for the L.L.M course was Rs 5000 till the academic year 2008-09. This fee has been enhanced to Rs.10,000 as per the proposal passed in the meeting of Faculty of Law and Board of Studies and the same has been approved and ratified by the Finance Committee and the Executive Committee. Hence, the revised fee was introduced in the Rules of the Entrance Examination for the year 2009-10 which was accepted by the Petitioner without any protest.�

From the factual position stated in this affidavit, which has remained unrefuted, it is amply clear that the decision to enhance the fees for the LL.M. course to Rs.10,000/- per semester was taken on 02.08.2008 by the Faculty of Law and Board of Studies of Law. It was much before the commencement of admission process for academic year 2009-2010. Further, the said decision was later on duly approved at the highest level by the Vice Chancellor of the University. The affidavit also discloses and places on record the relevant documents including the decision of the Executive Council approving the proposal of enhancing the fees. To put it differently, the matter regarding enhancement of fees was already under consideration of the University before the commencement of Academic Session 2009-2010 in which the petitioners sought admission. The admission process commenced on that basis and, in fact, the petitioners took admission accordingly. The argument of the petitioners that Ordinance No.23A does not exist at all will have to be stated to be rejected. There is no reason to doubt the statement made on affidavit by the Registrar of the University about the formation of Rules of the LL.M. course as per Ordinance No.23A. It is for the petitioners to substantiate the contention that such Ordinance does not exist. No such plea is found in the writ petition, as filed.

Indeed, our attention was invited to the averments in rejoinder-affidavit filed by the petitioners wherein it is asserted for the first time that Ordinance 23A does not exist at all. The averments in the rejoinder cannot be the basis to entertain this grievance of the petitioners not being part of the pleadings in the writ petition and, more so, because the Registrar of the University on affidavit has asserted about the existence of such Ordinance and which factual assertion has remained un-rebutted.

We may also notice the provision pressed into service by the counsel for the University that there is ample enabling power vested in the Vice Chancellor including to enhance the fees by virtue of Section 15(4) of the Madhya Pradesh Vishwa Vidyalaya Adhiniyam, 1973. It was submitted that after enhancement of the fees and approval by the Vice Chancellor necessary budgetary provisions were made and have been acted upon by the University from Academic Year 2009-2010.

Taking overall view of the matter, therefore, we find no merits in this petition. Hence, dismissed.