Supreme Court Upholds Dissolution of Private University for Non-Compliance with Statutory Appointment Procedure — Visitor's Directions and Dissolution Order Valid as University Failed to Obtain Approval for Chancellor's Appointment. The Court held that the appointment of Chancellor under Section 14(1) of the Chandra Mohan Jha University Act, 2009 requires prior approval of the Visitor, and the University cannot assume deemed approval.

  • 1396
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The case pertains to the dissolution of CMJ University, a private university established under the Chandra Mohan Jha University Act, 2009 (the Act) by the CMJ Foundation. The dispute arose from the appointment of Shri Chander Mohan Jha as the Chancellor of the University by the Board of Trustees on 29th July, 2009, subject to the approval of the Visitor (Governor of Meghalaya) under Section 14(1) of the Act. Despite several reminders, the Visitor did not grant approval. The University assumed deemed approval and commenced operations. In 2013, the Visitor issued directions under Section 13(3)(b) of the Act, requiring the University to recall degrees, submit a fresh proposal for Chancellor, and frame rules for M.Phil/Ph.D programs. The University challenged these directions, but the High Court upheld them. Subsequently, the State Government issued show cause notices and eventually dissolved the University on 31st March, 2014 under Section 48 of the Act. The learned Single Judge quashed the dissolution order and show cause notices. The Division Bench set aside the Single Judge's order and remanded the matter for fresh consideration. The Supreme Court upheld the Division Bench's decision, holding that the appointment of Chancellor was irregular as it lacked the Visitor's approval, and the dissolution order was validly passed after due process. The Court directed the Single Judge to decide the matter afresh on merits within six months.

Headnote

A) University Law - Appointment of Chancellor - Section 14(1) of the Chandra Mohan Jha University Act, 2009 - The appointment of the Chancellor requires prior approval of the Visitor (Governor). The University cannot assume deemed approval in the absence of a response. The Visitor's letters dated 4th April, 2013 and 11th April, 2013 highlighting the irregularity were valid. (Paras 27-34)

B) University Law - Visitor's Powers - Section 13(3)(b) of the Chandra Mohan Jha University Act, 2009 - The Visitor has the power to issue directions if any order, proceeding or decision is not in conformity with the Act, Regulations or Rules. The directions dated 30th April, 2013 were legally sound and binding. (Paras 35-43)

C) University Law - Dissolution of University - Section 48 of the Chandra Mohan Jha University Act, 2009 - The dissolution order dated 31st March, 2014 was passed after issuing show cause notices and providing opportunity of hearing. The University failed to comply with the Visitor's directions and the appointment of Chancellor remained unapproved. The dissolution was valid. (Paras 44-46)

D) Civil Procedure - Remand - The Division Bench of the High Court was justified in remanding the matter to the learned Single Judge for fresh consideration on merit, as the Single Judge had quashed the dissolution order without properly considering the validity of the appointment of Chancellor and the compliance with Section 48. (Paras 47-50)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the appointment of the Chancellor of CMJ University was made with due adherence to the procedure mandated by law; Whether the dissolution order dated 31st March, 2014 was passed with due adherence to Section 48 of the CMJ University Act, 2009 and in compliance of the directions issued by this Court; Whether the Division Bench of the High Court was justified in remanding the matter to the learned Single Judge for reconsideration on merit

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeals and upheld the Division Bench's order remanding the matter to the learned Single Judge for fresh consideration on merit. The Court held that the appointment of Chancellor was irregular for lack of Visitor's approval, and the dissolution order was validly passed. The Single Judge is directed to decide the matter afresh within six months.

Law Points

  • Appointment of Chancellor requires prior approval of Visitor
  • no deemed approval
  • Visitor's power to issue directions under Section 13(3)(b)
  • dissolution under Section 48 requires show cause and opportunity of hearing
  • High Court Division Bench justified in remanding for fresh consideration
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2025 LawText (SC) (03) 289

Civil Appeal No(s). 9694 of 2024 with Civil Appeal No(s). 9695 of 2024

2025-03-21

Mehta, J.

2025 INSC 211

CMJ Foundation and Others

State of Meghalaya and Others

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Civil appeals challenging the judgment of the Division Bench of the High Court of Meghalaya which set aside the Single Judge's order quashing the dissolution of CMJ University and remanded the matter for fresh consideration.

Remedy Sought

The appellants (CMJ Foundation and others) sought to set aside the Division Bench's order and restore the Single Judge's order quashing the dissolution.

Filing Reason

The appellants challenged the dissolution order dated 31st March, 2014 passed by the State Government dissolving the CMJ University, and the show cause notices leading to it.

Previous Decisions

The learned Single Judge of the High Court quashed the dissolution order and show cause notices on 16th July, 2015. The Division Bench set aside that order and remanded the matter on 6th May, 2021.

Issues

Whether the appointment of the Chancellor of the CMJ University was made with due adherence to the procedure mandated by law? Whether the dissolution order dated 31st March, 2014 was passed with due adherence to Section 48 of the CMJ University Act, 2009 and in compliance of the directions issued by this Court? Whether the Division Bench of the High Court was justified in remanding the matter to the learned Single Judge for reconsideration on merit?

Submissions/Arguments

Appellants argued that the appointment of Chancellor was valid as the Visitor did not respond, leading to deemed approval, and that the dissolution order was passed without proper show cause and opportunity of hearing. Respondent-State argued that the appointment of Chancellor was never approved by the Visitor, and the dissolution was validly passed after issuing show cause notices and providing opportunity of hearing.

Ratio Decidendi

The appointment of the Chancellor under Section 14(1) of the Act requires prior approval of the Visitor; there is no concept of deemed approval. The Visitor has power under Section 13(3)(b) to issue directions. The dissolution under Section 48 requires show cause and opportunity of hearing, which was complied with. The Division Bench was justified in remanding the matter for fresh consideration as the Single Judge did not properly consider the validity of the appointment and the compliance with Section 48.

Judgment Excerpts

Section 14(1) of the CMJ University Act, 2009 makes it obligatory on the part of the University to appoint Chancellor subject to approval of the Visitor... The provisions of the CMJ University Act, 2009, does not support the contention... that there would be a 'deemed approval' for appointment of the Chancellor if the Governor fails to communicate. The Visitor... may issue such directions as he may deem fit in the interest of the University which will be binding to all concerned.

Procedural History

The CMJ University was established in 2009. The Chancellor was appointed without Visitor's approval. In 2013, the Visitor issued directions. The University challenged them but lost. Show cause notices were issued in 2013 and 2014, and the University was dissolved on 31st March, 2014. The Single Judge quashed the dissolution on 16th July, 2015. The Division Bench set aside that order and remanded on 6th May, 2021. The Supreme Court heard the appeals and delivered judgment on 21st March, 2025.

Acts & Sections

  • Chandra Mohan Jha University Act, 2009: Section 13, Section 14, Section 48
  • University Grants Commission Act, 1956: Section 22
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Karnataka High Court Allows Writ Petition Seeking Mandamus for FIR Registration Due to Police Inaction. Failure to Register FIR Violates Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution and the Mandatory Duty under Section 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure...
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Karnataka Quashes Endorsement Denying Fair Price Shop Authorization to 78-Year-Old Widow in Food and Civil Supplies Matter — Failure to Consider Representation and Lack of Speaking Order Violates Principles of Natural Justice. The cou...