Abhinav Singh vs. The State Of Uttarakhand

COURT NO.16

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 12432/2022

(Arising out of impugned judgment and order dated 10-06-2022 in SPLA No. 125/2022 passed by the High Court of Uttarakhand at Nainital)

SALMAN BADAR & ORS.

Petitioner(s)

VERSUS

THE STATE OF UTTARAKHAND & ORS.

Respondent $(s)$

(FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.96008/2022-EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. and IA No.100766/2022-EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. and $\mathbf{I}\mathbf{A}$ No.96006/2022-PERMISSION TO FILE LENGTHY LIST OF DATES and $\mathbf{I}\mathbf{A}$ No.100762/2022-PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ ANNEXURES)

WITH

$SLP(C)$ No. 12860-12862/2022 (X) (FOR APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS ON IA 6565/2023 FOR CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION ON IA 27580/2023)

SLP(C) No. 13124-13125/2022 (X) (FOR APPROPRIATE ORDERS/DIRECTIONS ON IA 6558/2023 FOR CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION ON IA 27597/2023)

SLP(C) No. 13034-13035/2022 (X) (IA No. 131277/2022 - CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION IA No. 131278/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 103746/2022 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. IA No. 103745/2022 - PERMISSION TO FILE LENGTHY LIST OF DATES)

$SLP(C)$ No. 18063/2022 (X) (FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. ON IA 154103/2022 FOR CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION ON IA 171551/2022 FOR MODIFICATION OF COURT ORDER ON IA 174258/2022 FOR DELETING THE NAME OF PETITIONER/RESPONDENT ON IA 184255/2022 FOR PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES ON IA 196110/2022)

$SLP(C)$ No. 18435/2022 (X) (FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. ON IA 157146/2022 CLARIFICATION/DIRECTION ON IA 171558/2022 DELETING THE NAME OF PETITIONER/RESPONDENT ON IA 184246/2022 $\overline{F}$ PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES ON IA 196106/2022 FOR DELETING THE NAME OF PETITIONER/RESPONDENT ON IA 24437/2023)

$\mathbf{1}$

Date : 17-04-2023 These petitions were called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HRISHIKESH ROY HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ MISRA For Petitioner(s) Mr. Manoj Swarup, Sr. Adv. Mr. Santosh Kumar, Adv. Mr. Madhurendra Sharma, Adv. Mr. Rajiv Ranjan Mishra, Adv. Mr. Yadav Narender Singh, AOR Dr. Hemant Gupta, Adv. Ms. Payal Gupta, Adv. Mr. Jinendra Jain, AOR Mr. Adil Muneer Andrabi, AOR Mr. Yasser Jilani, Adv. Ms. Bisma Rashid, Adv. Ms. Mumtaz Ahmad, Adv. Mr. Waseem Rasool, Adv. Mr. Saddam Hussain, Adv. Mr. Yunus Malik, Adv. Mr. Pratham Sethi, Adv. Mr. Vijay Kumar Maurya, Adv. Mr. Aman Malik, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Ajit Sinha, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sanjeev Agarwal, AOR Mr. Ekansh Agarwal, Adv.

UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R

Heard Mr. Manoj Swarup, the learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. Ajit Sinha, the learned senior counsel appearing for the respondents.

This matter was taken up on 05.04.2023 where the Court observed that the mutual interest of both the students and also the self-financing institute, in the matter of collection of the fee is to be protected. Accordingly the matter was deferred expecting the parties to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution. Thereafter on 10.04.2023 the counsel appearing on behalf of the University has produced a chart indicating the fee payable by the concerned students and also identifying those students who have failed to

2

comply with the order dated 08.08.2022 whereby this Court directed all petitioners to deposit Rs.10 lakhs each, in this Court's Registry.

On the challenge to the rate of fee charged from the medical students, the contention raised by them have been rejected both by the Single Bench and also by the Division Bench of the High Court.

The students are now requiring their testimonials such as their Class X and Class XII examination certificates, their MBBS certificates and Internship certificates etc. which would enable them to pursue higher education or look for sources of employment. At the same time, the interest of the self financing institute cannot also be overlooked particularly when they have succeeded before the Single Bench and the Division Bench of the High Court in the mater of realisation of fee from the students.

Taking note of the above, we deem it appropriate to say that the concerned testimonials should be released to the students subject to remitting the arrear fee payable by each student, as noted in the chart produced on 10.04.2023. In the event, the decision of this Court goes against the respondent-University, they are obligated to refund the differential amount to the concerned students. The Registrar of the Swami Rama Himalayan University (respondent No. 3) will accordingly furnish an undertaking before this Court within two weeks from today to refund the differential fee amount, depending upon the outcome of the present matter. Only after the required fee is deposited by the students with the University, their testimonials should be released to the respective students. It is ordered accordingly.

3

(NITIN TALREJA) (KAMLESH RAWAT) COURT MASTER (SH) ASSISTANT REGISTRAR