HC ISSUED NOTICE TO GGSIP UNIVERSITY & COLLEGES ON PETITION CHALLENGING VALIDITY OF UNIVERSITY ‘S ORDINANCE ON MIGRATION OF STUDENTS

HC ISSUED NOTICE TO GGSIP UNIVERSITY & COLLEGES ON PETITION CHALLENGING VALIDITY OF UNIVERSITY ‘S ORDINANCE ON MIGRATION OF STUDENTS



NOTE OF THE COURT PROCEEDINGS DATED 15.09.2008





A Division Bench of Delhi High Court headed by Justice Vikramjit Sen today (15.09.2008) issued notices to the GGSIP University and three engineering colleges on a petition filed by by Nikhil Sharma, a second year B. Tec student of Maharaja Agarsen Institute of Technology through Advocates Ashok Agarwal and Anuj Agarwal challenging the validity of the Revised Ordinance 7 GGSIP University relating to migration of students.



Appearing for the petitioner, Mr. Ashok Agarwal submitted that the Revised Ordinance 7, relating to migration of students, purported to have been made under Section 27 of Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University Act, 1998 is ultra-virus the Constitution of India and contrary to the provisions of Act of 1998 as the same lacks transparency in the migration process as the vacant seats in each branch of various engineering college under G.G.S.I.P. University are not disclosed, thereby, resulting in depriving the candidates interested in migration from one college to another. Because of this, the Migration Rules have resulted in favoritism and denying equal opportunity to all to apply and be considered for migration from one college to another along with change of branch, submitted Mr. Agarwal.



The petitioner through the petition has sought direction against the IP University to make the migration process transparent by declaring the status of vacant seats in each branch of Engineering by displaying the same and/or by putting-up on university website for the information so that the students interested in migration could get equal opportunity to apply for migration. After allowing migration, its result should be displayed/put-up on university website for the information of the students.



The respondents have been directed to file their replies with 4 weeks and the matter is listed for hearing for 10.01.2009.



A copy of the petition is pasted below.



Ashok Agarwal, Advocate

M-09811101923

15.09.2008





IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI



W. P. (C) No. 6711 of 2008





IN THE MATTER OF: Writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India;



AND



IN THE MATTER OF: Constitutional validity of Revised Ordinance 7 relating to Migration of Students, purported to have been made under the provisions of Section 27 of Guru Gobind Singh Indra Prastha Act, 1998;



AND



IN THE MATTER OF: Failure on the part of Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University (G.G.S.I.P.U.) to consider the request of the petitioner for his migration in Second Year of B.Tec from Maharaja Agrasen Institute of Technology (MAIT) to Bhartiya Vidya Peeth College of Engineering (BVP) and Maharaja Surajmal Institute of Technology along with change of Branch of Electrical and Electronics Engineering (EEE) Branch to Computer Science Engineering (CSE)/ Electronics & Communication Engineering (ECE) Branch;



AND



IN THE MATTER OF: Violation of Fundamental Rights as guaranteed to the petitioner under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India read with the provisions of Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University Act, 1998;



AND



IN THE MATTER OF: 1. Constitution of India ; and

2. Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University Act, 1998.

AND



IN THE MATTER OF:

Shri Nikhil Sharma

S/o Shri N. H. Sharma

R/o A-5, LIC Colony,

Pashchim Vihar,

New Delhi-110087 …Petitioner





Versus





1. Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University (GGSIPU)

Through it’s Registrar

Kashmiri Gate

Delhi-110403



2. Bhartiya Vidya Peeth (BVP)

College of Engineering

Through it’s Principal

A-4, Pashchim Vihar

Main Rohtak Road

New Delhi-110063



3. Maharaja Surajmal Insitute of Technology (MSIT)

Through it’s Principal

C-4, Janakpuri,

New dElhi-110058



4. Maharaja Agrasen Institute of Technology (MAIT)

Through it’s Principal

PSP Area, Sector-22, Rohini,

Delhi-110086 …Respondents





To

THE HON’BLE CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI AND HIS COMPANION JUSTICES OF THE SAID HIGH COURT

___________________________________________



The humble petition of the petitioner named above



MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:



1. The present writ petition is directed against the impugned Revised Ordinance 7, relating to migration of students, purported to have been made under Section 27 of Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University Act, 1998 (in short, ‘Act of 1998’). It is submitted that the impugned Ordinance is ultra-virus to the Constitution of India and contrary to the provisions of Act of 1998 as the same lacks transparency in the migration process as the vacant seats in each branch of various engineering college under G.G.S.I.P. University are not disclosed, thereby, resulting in depriving the candidates interested in migration from one college to another. Because of this, the Migration Rules have resulted in favoritism and denying equal opportunity to all to apply and be considered for migration from one college to another along with change of branch. The other grievance of the petitioner is that he has made two applications dated 29.07.2008 and 09.08.2008 to the GGSIP University but till date he has not received any response to anyone of them.



True copies of the impugned Ordinance 7 relating to Migration of Students and aforementioned applications are enclosed hereto as Annexure A, B & C respectively.



2. The petitioner by the present writ petition has raised the following vital questions of law of general public importance, as well as of private importance, for determination by this Hon’ble Court: -



i. Whether the impugned Ordinance 7 relating to migration of students, purported to have been made under Section 27 of GGSIP University Act, 1998 is illegal, unconstitutional, violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and contrary to the provisions of Act of 1998?



ii. Whether the impugned inaction on the part of I.P. University to consider the applications dated 29.07.2008 (Annexure B) and dated 09.08.2008 (Annexure C) tantamounts to failure on the part of G.G.S.I.P. University to perform it’s duties and functions as provided under the Act of 1998?



iii. Whether the petitioner is entitled to migration as sought by him in the present petition?



3. The facts of the case so far as relevant for the purposes of the present writ petition are given as under.



4. The petitioner has taken admission in B.Tec Programme with Electrical and Electronics Engineering (EEE) branch in Maharaja Agrasen Institute of Technology (MAIT), hereinafter referred as Respondent no. 4, under G.G.S.P.I. University (hereinafter referred as respondent University) in the academic year 2007-2008. He has successfully completed first and second semester (First Year) and has now been promoted to third semester (Second Year).



5. The petitioner submits that, as per the impugned Ordinance 7 relating to migration of students from one institute to another institute of the respondent University in third semester after obtaining NOC from both the institutes, the petitioner applied to the respondent university for considering his case for migration from respondent no. 4 college to BVP (hereinafter referred as respondent no. 2 college) and MSIT (hereinafter referred as respondent no. 3 college) along with the change of Branch. It is submitted that till date he has not received any response to his said applications despite the fact the he has personally approached the respondent university number of times in this regard.



6. The petitioner submits that as abundant caution he has also submitted request for NOC for migration to the respondent No. 2 and 3 colleges vide letters-dated 05.08.2008. It is submitted that the petitioner has not received any response till date of the said letter.



True copies of the said applications are annexed hereto as Annexure D collectively.



7. The petitioner submits that, somehow, he came to know that one Shri Ramesh Sahi, a student of CSC Branch (2007 Batch) studying in HMRITM is interested for migration. Thereafter, the petitioner applied for NOC to the HMRITM and got the same vide letter-dated 07.08.2008. However, on finding that the said institute is about 30 Kms. from his residence, the petitioner vide letter dated 21.08.2008 requested the respondent University to consider his earlier request as withdrawn. It is also submitted that the NOC from the said institute was conditional on migration of Mr. Ramesh Shahi, which has not happened till date. It is also submitted that vide letter dated 21.08.2008, the petitioner maintained his request for migration from MAIT to BVP COE, MSIT, USIT or BPIT along with change of Branch from EEE to CSE/ECE.



True copies of the said letter dated 07.08.2008 and 21.08.2008 are enclosed hereto as Annexure E.



8. The petitioner submits that the aforesaid requests were followed by a representation-dated 05.09.2008 to the respondent University, whereby, the petitioner once again requested for consideration of his case for migration.l



A true copy of the said representation dated 05.09.2008 is enclosed hereto as Annexure F.



9. The petitioner further submits that this Hon’ble Court in a similar matter titled Samar Khan vs. Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University [W.P. (C) 6143 of 2007] vide Order dated 13.11.2007 was pleased to direct respondent college to take necessary action for permitting the petitioner stududent.



True copy of the Order dated 13.11.2007 is annexed hereto as Annexure G.



10. The petitioner respectfully submits that the impugned revised Ordinance 7, relating to migration of students (Annexure-A) us illegal, unconstitutional, hit by Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India, arbitrary, discriminatory and contrary to the provisions of Act of 1998 and bad in law for the following among other REASONS: -



a. The impugned ordinance requires NOC from both the colleges/institutes, which is not possible in absence, non-disclosure or not making public the vacancy position in the institute/colleges of GGSIP University .



b. No details regarding vacant positions for the purpose of migration on the respondent University website which results in filling-up the vacant position on the ground of favoritism and pick & choose basis.



c. In the absence of availability of timely information, through website or by notification of the same on the Notice Board, regarding vacant positions for the purpose of migration, all the students interested for migration are deprived of equal opportunity to apply and to be considered for the purpose of migration.



d. The impugned Ordinance does not lay down the guidelines for considering cases of inter-university migrations and, therefore, the same is open for abuse, favoritism and pick & choose. The special circumstances for inter-university migration as contemplated in the impugned Ordinance do not spell-out the circumstances relevant for the said purpose.



e. Various seats falling vacant in the colleges/institutes under respondent university are filled-up from other Universities without following any transparent, fair and just method or procedure.



f. No transparent, just and fair method/process is adopted to fill-up the vacant positions in the colleges/institutions under respondent University for the purpose of migration.



11. That the impugned action/inaction on the part of the respondent University are challenged on the following, amongst other, GROUNDS: -



a. The impugned Ordinance 7 relating to migration of students is arbitrary, discriminatory, illegal, unconstitutional, violative of Article 14 & 21 of the Constitution of India, contrary to the provisions of the Act of 1998, devoid of transparency, just & fair method/process for migration.



b. The impugned inaction on the part of the respondent University in considering and deciding the applications dated 29.07.2008 & 09.08.2008 (Annexure B & C) of the petitioner for migration is illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional, violative of Article 14 & 21 of the Constitution of India and contrary to the Act of 1998.



c. The respondent university is obliged to consider and decide the application of the petitioner for the purpose of migration.



d. The petitioner has a right to know the vacant position in the colleges/institutes under respondent university for the purpose of migration through website or public notice so as to enable him to apply for NOC to the respective college/institutes.



e. The respondent university has adopted totally non-transparent, unfair and unjust and unguided procedure/method for considering cases for migration.



f. The impugned action/inaction of respondent University is otherwise also bad in law.



12. That the petitioner submits that he has not filed any similar petition in the Hon’ble Supreme Court or in any High Court in India .



13. That the petitioner submits that he has no other efficacious alternative remedy except to approach this Hon’ble Court by way of present writ petition.



Prayer


In the premise aforesaid, the petitioner most humbly prays that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to: -



(a) Declare the impugned Ordinance 7 relating to migration of students (Annexure A), purported to have been made under Section 27 of Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University Act, 1998, as unconstitutional illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory, violative of article 14 & 21 of the Constitution of India and contrary to the provisions of Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University Act, 1998 and strike-down the same;



(b) Issue appropriate writ, order of direction directing the respondent University to forthwith consider and decide the applications dated 29.07.2008 & 09.08.2008 (Annexure B & C) of the petitioner for the purpose of migration.



(c) Issue appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondent University to make the migration process transparent by declaring the status of vacant seats in each branch of Engineering by displaying the same and/or by putting-up on university website for the information so that the students interested in migration could get equal opportunity to apply for migration. After allowing migration, its result should be displayed/put-up on university website for the information of the students.



(d) Pass any such other and further Orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case;



(e) Allow the present writ petition with costs.







New Delhi (Anuj Aggarwal)

Dated: 09.09.2008 Advocate for the Petitioner
















****************************************************
VirusFree, Spamfree, power packed email service.
Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Limited ****************************************************