High CourtsSingle Bench(2025) 09 DEL CK 1520

M/S Pillar Enterprises vs Jamia Millia Islamia

Delhi High Court · Decided on 22 September 2025

HON’BLE JUDGES
Sachin Datta, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
W.P.(C) 10786/2025

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

92 paragraphs · 2,534 words

SACHIN DATTA, J. (ORAL)

1.

The present application assails an order dated 19.07.2025, passed by the respondent/non-applicant, whereby the licence of the petitioner for running a photocopy/stationery shop has been terminated.

2.

Further, the petitioner has been sought to be blacklisted permanently from all present and future commercial engagements/contracts with Jamia Milia Islamia/respondent.

3.

The impugned order dated 19.07.2025 reads as under:

जामिया मिल्लिया इस्लामिया (केन्द्रीय विश्वविद्यालय) (नैक प्रत्यायित 'A++' ग्रेड) मौलाना मोहम्मद अली जौहर मार्ग, नई दिल्ली-110025

JAMIA MILLIA ISLAMIA (A Central University) (NAAC Accredited 'A++' Grade) Maulana Mohammed Ali Jahubur Marg, New Delhi-110025

फोन : 26984075, 26988044 Tel. : 26981717, 26985176 फैक्स : 011-26980229 ई-मेल : [email protected] E-mail : http://jmi.ac.in Web. : 3rd Rank in NIRF

कुलसचिव कार्यालय

Office of the Registrar

अक़द

F. No. PS/Pillar Enterprises/JMI/2025

19th July, 2025

OFFICE ORDER

Whereas, vide Allotment Letter dated 19.02.2025, a shop premises near the Central Canteen, Main Campus, Jamia Millia Islamia was allotted to M/s Pillar Enterprises, for the purpose of operating a Photocopier/Stationery Shop, pursuant to which a formal Agreement was executed on 04.05.2025;

And Whereas, a written complaint dated 06.05.2025 was received from the competent Security Authority of the University alleging that M/s Pillar Enterprises was involved in illegal selling of forged medical certificates to the students in exchange for monetary consideration, thereby enabling misuse of university medical leave protocols;

And Whereas, preliminary verification of these allegations included obtaining a forged certificate from the said premises, following which an appropriate complaint was lodged with the local police, and an immediate Show Cause Notice dated 19.05.2025 was issued to M/s Pillar Enterprises, seeking an explanation;

And Whereas, to ensure adherence to principles of natural justice and proper fact-finding, a Committee was constituted vide Office Order dated 03.06.2025, to examine the complaint, review all relevant records, and hear the parties concerned;

And Whereas, the Committee conducted its proceedings, including multiple sittings, review of documents, and personal hearings of all stakeholders, and subsequently submitted a detailed report concluding that M/s Pillar Enterprises was involved in the supply of forged medical certificates to students, and recommended termination of the contract and blacklisting of the firm;

And Whereas, based on the said report, an Office Order dated 09.07.2025 was passed terminating the contract and blacklisting M/s Pillar Enterprises. The same was challenged by the said firm before the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in W.P.(C) 9996/2025, which, vide Order dated 16.07.2025, set aside the said order on the limited ground that a copy of the Committee's Report had not been supplied to M/s Pillar Enterprises before passing the order;

And Whereas, pursuant to the above direction of the Hon'ble Court, M/s Pillar Enterprises was provided with a complete copy of the Committee's Report along with all annexures and a copy of the executed Agreement, and was granted a full opportunity of hearing on 18.07.2025;

And Whereas, following the hearing, and after due consideration of both oral and written submissions made by M/s Pillar Enterprises, the Committee submitted a final minutes of its proceedings, reaffirming that:

- No new material evidence was presented by M/s Pillar Enterprises in their defence;

- The firm failed to demonstrate due diligence or provide credible rebuttal to the serious allegations;

- The contention that the firm merely provided printouts and the explanations offered were not supported by any verifiable record and documents;

- The conduct of the firm amounts to gross negligence, seriously compromising the integrity of university processes;

- The video recording clearly depicts that the firm was illegally selling blank Medical Certificate.

जामिया मिल्लिया इस्लामिया (केन्द्रीय विश्वविद्यालय) (नेक प्रत्यायित 'A++' ग्रेड) मौलाना मोहम्मद अली जौहर मार्ग, नई दिल्ली-110025

JAMIA MILLIA ISLAMIA (A Central University) (NAAC Accredited 'A++' Grade) Maulana Mohammed Ali Jahuhar Marg, New Delhi-110025

दूरभाष : 26984075, 26988044 Tel. : 26981717, 26985176

फैक्स : 011-26980229

ई-मेल : [email protected]

वेबसाइट : http://jmi.ac.in

3rd Rank in NIRF

कुलसचिव कार्यालय

Office of the Registrar

Now, therefore, in view of the above facts and findings, and after providing due and fair opportunity of hearing in compliance with the directions of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi, the Competent Authority of Jamia Millia Islamia is satisfied that M/s Pillar Enterprises has committed serious contractual misconduct and violated legal and institutional norms. The hearing was concluded on 18.07.2025, in terms of the order and no plausible explanation has come forward.

Accordingly, it is hereby ordered that:

1.

The Agreement dated 04.05.2025 executed between Jamia Millia Islamia and M/s Pillar Enterprises stands terminated with immediate effect;

2.

M/s Pillar Enterprises is directed to vacate the allotted premises (Photocopier/Stationery Shop near Central Canteen, JMI) within three days of issuance of this Order. Failure to comply shall invite legal action, including sealing and eviction as per law;

3.

M/s Pillar Enterprises is hereby blacklisted permanently from all present and future commercial engagements with Jamia Millia Islamia;

4.

The Committee recommends the criminal proceedings be initiated against the firm.

This Office Order is issued with the approval of the Competent Authority, after full compliance with the principles of natural justice and the directions of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi dated 16.07.2025. The order shall come into immediate effect and shall remain binding.

The copy of this order along with the report/minutes of meeting dated 18.07.2025 is being provided to M/s Pillar Enterprises forthwith through e-mail as well as post.

To: Mr. Mohd Azhar Ansari M/s Pillar Enterprises Contractor, Xerox Shop New Delhi

Copy to the following for information and necessary action:

1.

The Security Advisor, JMI – for immediate implementation.

2.

The Property & Estate Section, JMI – for necessary follow-up.

3.

The Assistant Registrar, Legal Section, JMI – for record and legal compliance.

4.

The Dean Students' Welfare, JMI – for information.

5.

Office File – M/s Pillar Enterprises.

4.

The above order was passed in the backdrop of an order dated 16.07.2025, passed by this Court in W.P.(C) 9996/2025, which reads as under:

“3.

By way of the present petition the petitioner assails the order dated 09.07.2025, passed by the respondent, i.e., Jamia Milia Islamia. The said order reads as under:

“F.No. PS/Pillar Enterprises/JMI/2025 09.07.2025

OFFICE ORDER

Following a serious complaint dated 06.05.2025 from the Security Advisor, JMI against M/s Pillar Enterprises (Xerox Point near Central Canteen) regarding the unlawful issuance of forged medical certificates to students in exchange for money, a three-member committee was constituted on 03.06.2025 to investigate this severe violation and breach of the contract agreement.

The contractor, M/s Pillar Enterprise, and the Security Advisor were invited to provide their statements in person in the meeting of the committee held on 12.06.2025. Following thorough investigation of the complaints, verification of the documents, and their statements, the committee found M/s Pillar Enterprises guilty of the aforementioned charges.

Consequently, on the recommendations of the Committee, the Competent Authority has passed the following orders with immediate effect:

1.

The agreement with the said shop has been cancelled.

2.

M/s Pillar Enterprises is required to vacate the premises (Xerox Point near Central Canteen) within 3 days of receiving this Office Order, failing which legal action will be initiated accordingly.

3.

M/s Pillar Enterprises has been blacklisted from all further business activities in JMI.

This is issued with the approval of the Competent Authority.

4.

The limited contention made by learned counsel for the petitioner is that not only has the contract between the petitioner and the respondent been sought to be cancelled, but the petitioner has also been sought to be blacklisted by the respondent, without even providing the petitioner a copy of the recommendation of the committee on which reliance has been placed in the impugned order. It is submitted that the same amounts to a gross denial of the principles of natural justice, inasmuch as the petitioner has not been allowed to present its version as regards the exercise conducted by the concerned committee.

5.

Learned counsel for the respondent, who appears on advance notice, submits that the petitioner had participated in the proceedings before the committee, and the petitioner’s version has been taken note of in the recommendation of the committee. It is on that basis that the impugned order has been passed. However, it is undisputed that the report/recommendation of the committee was not provided to the petitioner.

6.

In the circumstances, since the impugned order has been passed without providing the petitioner a copy of the report/recommendation of the committee on which the impugned order is predicated, there has been apparent infraction of the principles of natural justice. Accordingly, the said order is set aside. However, it is clarified the respondent is at liberty to pass a fresh order after providing a copy of the committee’s report/recommendation to the petitioner and after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

7.

During the course of the hearing, a copy of the report/ recommendation has been provided to the petitioner.

8.

Learned counsel for the respondent submits that a hearing will be provided by the concerned Officer who issued the Show Cause Notice (SCN) on 18.07.2025. The concerned officer shall be at liberty to pass a reasoned order thereafter, taking into account all aspects of the matter.

9.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has not been provided a copy of the agreement entered into between the petitioner and the respondent. Although the same is refuted by learned counsel for the respondent, he submits that to obviate any controversy, another copy of the agreement shall be provided to the petitioner by tomorrow i.e. 17.07.2025.

10.

It is made clear that upon a reasoned order passed by the respondent, the same shall become executable immediately. Needless to say, the same shall be subject to the legal rights and remedies of the parties.

11.

It is undertaken by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner shall participate in the hearing scheduled on 18.07.2025 and shall not take any adjournment in any circumstances. In the event of any adjournment being sought, it shall be open to the concerned officer to issue appropriate interim directions.

12.

Order dasti.”

5.

In the immediate aftermath of the aforesaid order, a hearing is stated to have been afforded to the petitioner on 18.07.2025, pursuant to which the aforesaid impugned order dated 19.07.2025 was passed.

6.

Leaned counsel for the petitioner assails the impugned order, raising the following contentions:

(i)

It is contended that the copy of the Report of the Committee was provided to the petitioner on 18.07.2025 at 1:15 PM and a hearing was scheduled at 03.30 PM. As such, the petitioner was not even granted enough time to peruse the Report of the Committee and to make an appropriate submission in its defence.

(ii)

It is submitted that the impugned order, apart from terminating the petitioner’s licence, seeks to permanently blacklist the petitioner from all present and future dealings. It is submitted that the said directions are extremely harsh and amounts to serious infringement on the petitioner’s right under Article 19 of the Constitution of India.

(iii)

Lastly, it is submitted that the allegations on the basis of which the action has been taken are unsubstantial and, as such, there was no occasion to terminate the licence of the petitioner.

7.

The aforesaid contentions are opposed by learned counsel for the respondent, contending that the impugned order was passed in scrupulous compliance with the directions contained in the order dated 16.07.2025, passed by this Court.

8.

It is further emphasized that the conduct of the petitioner has been egregious inasmuch as the petitioner was using the respondent university premises for selling forged medical certificates to the students.

9.

It is further submitted that it is the prerogative of the concerned university to consider whether the petitioner is to be allowed to engage in vending activities from the university or not, especially considering the grave and serious allegations against the petitioner.

10.

It is undisputed that the Licence Agreement between the petitioner and the respondent is terminable. The same does not create any vested right in the petitioner to continue its vending activities within the premises of the university in question.

11.

The action of termination of the Licence Agreement has been resorted to by the respondent on the basis of the provisions of the Licence Agreement.

12.

It transpires that the Licence Agreement also contains an arbitration clause which is in the following terms:

“16.

In case of any dispute / difference between the parties herein the matter shall be referred for adjudication with reference to arbitration to the Vice Chancellor, Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi-110025 whose decision shall be final and conclusive and binding on the parties herein.”

13.

In these proceedings, this Court does not deem it appropriate to construe the relevant provisions of the Licence Agreement and enter into the thicket of disputed factual aspects and interpretation of relevant provisions of the Licence Agreement. Suffice it to say, it is open to the petitioner to invoke the arbitration clause in the agreement to agitate its grievance as regards the termination of the licence.

14.

It is also noticed that pursuant to the order dated 16.07.2025, passed by this Court, there has been substantial compliance with the principles of natural justice inasmuch as a hearing was afforded to the petitioner on 18.07.2025, and it was in pursuance of the said hearing that the impugned order came to be passed.

15.

However, insofar as the impugned order seeks to virtually blacklist the petitioner in perpetuity, learned counsel for the respondent does not dispute that the impugned order is unreasoned and bereft of any rational basis for taking such action.

16.

In the circumstances, the impugned order dated 19.07.2025 to the extent that it seeks to blacklist the petitioner from all present and future commercial arrangements/contracts of Jamia Milia Islamia/respondent is set aside.

17.

However, it is clarified that in case the respondent seeks to blacklist the petitioner, it shall be open to issue a ‘Show Cause Notice’ (SCN) to the petitioner, clearly setting out the basis for the proposed blacklisting action and also clearly setting out the period for which the petitioner is proposed to be banned.

18.

Needless to say, the petitioner would be provided an opportunity to respond to the said show cause notice and blacklisting/debarring action, if any, shall be taken only after complying with the principles of natural justice.

19.

Since the shop of the petitioner is stated to have been sealed in the aftermath of the impugned order dated 19.07.2025, it is directed that the same shall be de-sealed only to enable the petitioner to take out its articles lying therein. For the said purpose, the petitioner shall approach the Assistant Registrar (AR), Property Section of the respondent. Upon the petitioner submitting a request, the shop in question shall be de-sealed for a period of 24 hours to enable the petitioner to take all its articles therefrom.

20.

One of the contentions raised by the petitioner is that the sealing of the shop is itself illegal and is in contravention of the Licence Agreement. The petitioner would be at liberty to agitate this aspect in the arbitration proceedings.

21.

The petition is disposed of in the above terms.

22.

The date already fixed i.e. 20.11.2025, stands cancelled.