CMJ FOUNDATION AND OTHERS versus STATE OF MEGHALAYA AND OTHERS

CMJ FOUNDATION AND OTHERS versus STATE OF MEGHALAYA AND OTHERS

The Supreme Court held that under Section 14(1) the Sponsor's appointment of the Chancellor is conditional on and requires the Visitor's approval; because the Visitor never approved, the appointment was non est and void ab initio. The Court further held that the State complied with its obligations under Section 48 by issuing show cause notices, considering replies and passing a reasoned speaking dissolution order dated 31 March 2014, and therefore the dissolution was affirmed. Finally, the Court held the Division Bench's remand to the Single Judge was unjustified and set aside that remand.

Parties
Appellants: CMJ Foundation and Others; Respondents: State of Meghalaya and Others
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
13 February 2025
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal in the Supreme Court
Outcome
Civil Appeal No. 9694 of 2024 dismissed; Civil Appeal No. 9695 of 2024 allowed in part and remand set aside; dissolution order dated 31 March 2014 affirmed
Legal Topics
Appointment of Chancellor, Dissolution Under Section 48, Visitor's Approval, Deemed Approval, Remand and Appellate Practice, Wednesbury Principle, Legal Fiction, Natural Justice
Education Law Administrative Law Statutory Interpretation Civil Procedure Appointment of Chancellor Dissolution Under Section 48 Visitor's Approval Deemed Approval +4 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 6 Authorities cited 22 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CMJ Foundation and Others

Appellants

State of Meghalaya and Others

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal in the Supreme Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appointment of the Chancellor of the CMJ University was made with due adherence to the procedure, as mandated by law
  2. 2 Whether the dissolution order dated 31st March, 2014 was passed with due adherence to the procedure provided under Section 48 of the CMJ University Act, 2009 and in compliance of the directions issued by this Court vide order dated 13th September, 2013 in SLP(C) No. 19617 of 2013
  3. 3 Whether the Division Bench of the High Court of Meghalaya was justified in remanding the matter to the learned Single Judge for reconsideration on merit, while allowing the Writ Appeal No. 14 of 2017

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court held that under Section 14(1) the Sponsor's appointment of the Chancellor is conditional on and requires the Visitor's approval; because the Visitor never approved, the appointment was non est and void ab initio. The Court further held that the State complied with its obligations under Section 48 by issuing show cause notices, considering replies and passing a reasoned speaking dissolution order dated 31 March 2014, and therefore the dissolution was affirmed. Finally, the Court held the Division Bench's remand to the Single Judge was unjustified and set aside that remand.

Court Disposition

Civil Appeal No. 9694 of 2024 dismissed; Civil Appeal No. 9695 of 2024 allowed in part and remand set aside; dissolution order dated 31 March 2014 affirmed

Orders

  • Civil Appeal No. 9694 of 2024 dismissed
  • Civil Appeal No. 9695 of 2024 allowed and the direction to remand the matter to the Single Judge set aside