Plea challenging repealing Act on Rajitlal varsity dismissed

SHILLONG, April 4: The High Court of Meghalaya on Friday dismissed a writ petition filed by the Rajitlal Institute of Technology and Health Sciences (RITHS) Trust, which challenged the Rajitlal University (Repealing) Act passed by the Meghalaya Assembly.
The Rajitlal University Act received the Governor’s assent on January 31, 2020. It was repealed three years later through the Rajitlal University (Repealing) Act, 2023.
The petition challenged the repealing Act with a prayer for an ad interim order staying its operation.
A Division Bench of the court comprising Chief Justice Indra Prasanna Mukerji and Justice Wanlura Diengdoh said the unique feature of this Act is that the RITHS Trust, the sponsor described in Section 2 (xxii), was given the right to establish the university according to the provisions of the Act.
The Act, as such, did not found or establish it under Section 3(1). Under Section 3(2), this sponsor was required to apply to the state government with a detailed proposal to set up the university.
Upon the satisfaction of the state government under Section 4(1), the sponsor would be called upon to create an endowment fund according to the guidelines issued by the University Grants Commission. Section 4(2) provides that on being satisfied that these conditions had been fulfilled by the sponsor, the state government would, by notification, formally establish the university.
Under Section 5, the university would be self-financing. By the Rajitlal University (Repealing) Act, 2023, the Rajitlal University Act, 2011, was repealed. It was preceded by the Rajitlal University (Repealing) Ordinance, 2023.
The court observed that the most extraordinary and ingenious feature of this transaction between the petitioners and the government was that the latter did not enter into any contract with the petitioners for founding a university. The university was sought to be set up through legislation.
The said Act did not set it up. There was a machinery provided in the Act itself for setting it up in future, the court observed.
“As the provisions of the Act suggest, it was not born out of the said Act but would be born on fulfilment of the conditions of the Act by the writ petitioners. No contractual rights vested in the petitioners, for breach of which they could have filed an action for specific performance or damages or any other legal remedy,” the court said.
According to the court, under Article 246 of the Constitution of India, the state legislature has the power to legislate in respect of Entry 25 of List III, i.e., the Concurrent List relating to “education, including technical education, medical education and universities.”
In exercise of such power, the said Act was enacted and repealed thereafter. The power to enact and to repeal is the sole prerogative of the legislature.
“We are not aware of any power residing in the court to compel the legislature to enact a law or to stay or set aside the repeal thereof. The only power that the court has is to determine whether the enactment is a fraud on the Constitution or legislative power or ultra vires the Constitution or violative of any provision thereof,” the court said.
The court also observed that the petitioners have no right to question the legislature on what legislation it shall enact or shall not make, or whether it would repeal a particular Act. “Under the doctrine of separation of powers provided in our Constitution, Parliament and State Legislatures are the sole judges of what law they are to make. Neither can the petitioners question the truth of the assertion made in the object and reasons in support of the repealing Act,” it said.
The court further noted that three years have elapsed since the Act was enacted, and the petitioners did not provide any funds as contemplated under the Act.
“We cannot rule that the repealing Act is a fraud on the legislative power of the Meghalaya Assembly. For the above reasons, we find this writ to be an absolute abuse of the process of the court,” the court said.