Khalsa University and Another v. The State of Punjab and Another

 

[2024] 10 S.C.R. 445 : 2024 INSC 751

Khalsa University and Another v. The State of Punjab and Another

(Civil Appeal No. 10999 of 2024) 03 October 2024

[B.R. Gavai* and K.V. Viswanathan, JJ.]

Issue for Consideration

The High Court dismissed the writ petition filed by the appellants inter-alia seeking a writ in the nature of certiorari praying for quashing “The Khalsa University (Repeal) Act, 2017” dated 17^th July 2017. The issues which arises for consideration are: Whether an enactment for giving out a differential treatment to a single entity is valid in law or not; whether the Impugned Act is liable to be struck down on the ground of manifest arbitrariness.

Headnotes

Khalsa University (Repeal) Act, 2017 – Whether an enactment

for giving out a differential treatment to a single entity is valid in law or not:

Held: It is a settled position of law that though a legislation

affecting a single entity or a single undertaking or a single person

would be permissible in law, it must be on the basis of reasonable

classification having nexus with the object to be achieved –

There should be a reasonable differentia on the basis of which

a person, entity or undertaking is sought to be singled out from

the rest of the group – Further, if a legislation affecting a single

person, entity or undertaking is being enacted, there should be

special circumstances requiring such an enactment – Such special

circumstances should be gathered from the material taken into

consideration by the competent legislature and shall include the

Parliamentary/Legislative Debates – Also, wherever this Court

has upheld the legislation affecting the single entity, institution or

undertaking, it found that it was done in emergent and extreme

circumstances preceded by enquiries, parliamentary debates,

etc. – It was done when the legislature took into consideration the relevant material and found it expedient to do so – In the instant case, the impugned Act is a single entity legislation repealing the 2016 Act by which the Khalsa University was established – The Khalsa University has specifically averred that it has been singled out by the State Government amongst 16 Universities – It has also been averred that there is absolutely no reason or justification whereby the Khalsa University could be ordered to be shut down in such a discriminatory manner – The reply filed by the respondent no.1 does not deal with the submissions made by the appellants on the ground of discrimination – No material is placed on record as to what was the compelling and emergent situation so as to enact a law which could affect the Khalsa University (appellant No.1) – No material is placed on record to show that there were any discussions prior to the Impugned Act being passed or as to what material was placed and taken into consideration by the competent legislature – Since the Khalsa University had specifically pleaded a ground regarding discrimination, it was incumbent upon the respondents to have dealt with the said challenge – Therefore, the Impugned Act singled out the Khalsa University (appellant No.1) amongst 16 private Universities in the State and no reasonable classification has been pointed out to discriminate the Khalsa University (appellant No.1) against the other private Universities – The Impugned Act therefore would be discriminatory and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution.

[Paras 48, 53, 58, 59]

Khalsa University (Repeal) Act, 2017 – Constitution of

India – Art.14 – Whether the Impugned Act (Khalsa University (Repeal) Act, 2017) is liable to be struck down on the ground of manifest arbitrariness:

Held: The only reasoning given in the Statement of Objects and

Reasons of the Impugned Act is that the Khalsa College has, over

a period of time, become a significant icon of Khalsa heritage and

the University established in 2016 is likely to shadow and damage

its character and pristine glory – It is to be noted that the Khalsa

College which was established in 1892 is not a part of the Khalsa

University – During the course of hearing, a specific statement

has been made by the appellants that the Khalsa College would

not be affiliated with the Khalsa University – The maps have been

placed on record which show the placement of Khalsa College in

the campus along with the other institutions – The perusal of the

[2024] 10 S.C.R. 447

Khalsa University and Another v. The State of Punjab and Another

said map would clearly reveal that it is only the Khalsa College

established in 1892 which is a heritage one – All other buildings

have been subsequently constructed having no resemblance with

the Khalsa College building – It can thus be seen that the very

foundation that Khalsa University would shadow and damage the

character and pristine glory of Khalsa College which has, over a

period of time, become a significant icon of Khalsa heritage is on

a non-existent basis – It could thus be seen that the Impugned

Act, which was enacted with a purpose which was non-existent,

would fall under the ambit of manifest arbitrariness and would

therefore be violative of Article 14 of the Constitution – Therefore, this Court is of the considered view that the Impugned Act is also

liable to be set aside on the same ground. [Paras 64, 65]

Khalsa University (Repeal) Act, 2017 – Khalsa University Act, 2016 – Punjab Private Universities Policy, 2010 – Whether Khalsa University (Repeal) Act, 2017 is unconstitutional:

Held: Khalsa University (Repeal) Act, 2017 is struck down as being unconstitutional – The consequent direction is also issued to the effect that the Khalsa University Act, 2016 would be deemed to be in force and status quo as it obtained on 29.05.2017 would stand restored. [Para 66(iii)]

Constitution of India – Art.14 – Differential treatment to a single entity – Charanjit Lal Chowdhury v. Union of India

[1950] 1 SCR 869 – discussed. [Paras 26-39]

Case Law Cited

Chiranjit Lal Chowdhuri v. Union of India [1950] 1 SCR 869 : 1950

SCC 833 : AIR 1951 SC 41; D.S. Reddy v. Chancellor, Osmania

University and Others [1967] 2 SCR 214 : 1966 INSC 259; S.P.

Mittal v. Union of India and Others [1983] 1 SCR 729 : (1983)

1 SCC 51 : 1982 INSC 81; Shayara Bano v. Union of India and

Others (Ministry of Women and Child Development Secretary

and Others [2017] 9 SCR 797 : (2017) 9 SCC 1 : 2017 INSC

785 – followed.

Chandan Banerjee and Others v. Krishna Prosad Ghosh and

Others [2021] 11 SCR 720 : (2022) 15 SCC 453 : 2021 INSC

516; State of Tamil Nadu and Another v. National South Indian

River Interlinking Agriculturist Association [2021] 7 SCR 479 :

448 [2024] 10 S.C.R.

 (2021) 15 SCC 534 : 2021 INSC 777; Dharam Dutt and Others

v. Union of India and Others [2003] Supp. 6 SCR 151 : (2004) 1

SCC 712 : 2003 INSC 667; P. Venugopal v. Union of India [2008]

8 SCR 1 (2008) 5 SCC 1 : 2008 INSC 607; Natural Resources

Allocation, In re, Special Reference No. 1 of 2012 [2012] 9 SCR

311 : (2012) 10 SCC 1; Ajay Hasia and Others v. Khalid Mujib

Sehravardi and Others [1981] 2 SCR 79 : (1981) 1 SCC 722 :

1980 INSC 218; Ram Krishna Dalmia v. Justice S.R. Tendolkar

[1959] 1 SCR 279 : [AIR 1958 SC 538 : 1959 SCR 279]; Raja

Bira Kishore Deb v. State of Orissa [1964] 7 SCR 32 – referred to.

List of Acts

Khalsa University (Repeal) Act, 2017; Khalsa University Act, 2016;

Sholapur Spinning and Weaving Company (Emergency Provisions)

Act, 1950; The Sholapur Mill Act; Companies Act; Essential Supplies

Act; Osmania University (Second Amendment) Act, 1966; Auroville

(Emergency Provisions) Act, 1980; Indian Council of World Affairs

Act, 2001; Societies Registration Act, 1860; All-India Institute of

Medical Sciences Act, 1956; Delhi Special Police Establishment

Act, 1946; Constitution of India.

List of Keywords

Khalsa University (Repeal) Act, 2017; Differential treatment;

Reasonable classification; reasonable differentia; Parliamentary/

Legislative Debates; Arbitrariness; Article 14 of the Constitution;

Special treatment; Discriminatory character; Equal protection;

Mismanagement; Maladministration.

Case Arising From

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 10999 of 2024

From the Judgment and Order dated 01.11.2017 of the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh in CWP No. 17150 of 2017

Appearances for Parties

P.S. Patwalia, Sr.Adv., Ashok K. Mahajan, Advs. for the Appellants. Shadan Farasat, A.A.G., Siddhant Sharma, Abhishek Babbar, Ms. Sheetal Dubey, Ravinder Agarwal, Lekh Raj Singh, Advs. for the Respondents.