Hon'ble Mrs. Sangeeta Chandra,J.
This intra Court appeal has been filed by Deen Dayal Upadhyay Gorakhpur University, Gorakhpur as well as Vice Chancellor of the said University against the judgment and order of the writ court dated 04.10.2016 passed in Writ-C No. 20233 of 2015 (St. Andrew's College vs State of U.P. and 2 others).
Facts in short relevant for deciding the present special appeal are as under:
St. Andrew's College, Gorakhpur is a degree college affiliated to Deen Dayal Upadhyay Gorakhpur University, Gorakhpur (herein after referred to as "University"). The institution is stated to have been granted affiliation/permission for imparting education in the subject of Physical Education at graduate level by the University. Subsequently, it was realised that the land which was offered for the purpose of imparting the said education was not the property of the Institution/Society, which has established Institution. Accordingly, the University has decided not to extend the affiliation for imparting education in the subject of Physical Education for the Academic Session 2014-2015. It is against this order that the college approached the writ court. The learned Single Judge under the order impugned has recorded reasons for coming to a conclusion that the decision so taken by the University was bad and one of the reasons disclosed is that the material, which was relied upon by the University for coming to the conclusion that the land offered by the college was not its property, has been so arrived at without disclosing the adverse material to the Institution concerned. Reference has also been made to a decree passed by the competent civil court, the relevant portion whereof has been quoted in the order of the learned Single Judge.
Learned counsel for the appellant-University submits that the writ court has completely ignored the stand taken by the University in its counter affidavit. It was the case of the University that despite judgment and decree, the Institution could not be granted recognition/affiliation in the subject of physical education. Reference is made to the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Vinodkumar M. Malavia etc. vs Maganlal Mangaldas Gameti and others in Civil Appeal Nos. 8800-8801 of 2013 decided on 30.09.2013. It is submitted that opportunity of hearing was afforded to the Institution and they were granted liberty to produce relevant title documents before the District Magistrate, the report of the District Magistrate is based on the document supplied by the petitioner himself and that on the report of District Magistrate decision has been taken.
Shri Ajay Bhanot, learned counsel for the respondent in reply disputes the applicability of the law, which has been laid down in the case of Vinodkumar M. Malavia (supra). He further submitted that in view of the decree and judgment of the civil court, the issue does not survive for the University to consider any further.
We have heard learned counsel for the parties and examined the records of the present appeal. We are inclined to uphold the judgment and order of the learned Single Judge only on one short ground namely that the material, which has been relied upon by the University for coming to the conclusion that the land as offered by the institution was not its property, has been so taken on the basis of the report of the District Magistrate, which was not brought to the notice of the petitioner. It is settled law that if the authority concerned decides to rely upon certain material documentary evidence in support of its finding while passing the order adverse to other party it has to confront the other party with the material so proposed to be relied upon. In case of non compliance of the aforesaid, the order would be rendered bad being in violation of the principle of natural justice, inasmuch as every party must be made aware as to what material is to be considered against him so that he may have fair opportunity to respond to the same.
We therefore, in the facts of the case, disposed of the present appeal by providing as follows:
The University may take a fresh decision in the matter of grant of affiliation/recognition to the Institution for imparting education in the subject of physical education preferably within 8 weeks from the date of receipt of this order. All materials which University proposes to rely on must be brought to the notice of the petitioner-institution, they may be granted some reasonable time to rebut the same. The University shall thereafter take final decision by means of a reasoned order.
We clarify that none of the observations made by the learned Single Judge in the judgment and order impugned shall prejudice the decision to be taken as aforesaid.
All consequential action in respect of students, who have been admitted, shall be taken by the University immediately thereafter.
.
(Sangeeta Chandra, J)(Arun Tandon, J) Order Date :- 7.12.2016 Sazia