Patna High Court
Catalyst College,versusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- ALLOWED
- Bench
- ALOK KUMAR SINHA
Holding
The Registrar cannot unilaterally modify a statutory body's recommendation for permanent affiliation; such action is ultra vires, illegal, and violative of natural justice, and the AICTE’s annual Extension of Approval does not bar the grant of permanent affiliation under the Bihar State Universities Act.
Summary
Catalyst College, an affiliated institution of Patliputra University, challenged a corrigendum issued by the University’s Registrar that downgraded its permanent affiliation to temporary and reduced its BCA intake from 240 to 120 seats. The college argued that the permanent affiliation had been duly recommended by the Affiliation and New Teaching Programme Committee, Academic Council, Syndicate and Senate, and that the Registrar acted without authority, reason, or a hearing, violating natural justice and the Bihar State Universities Act. The University contended that AICTE’s annual Extension of Approval (EoA) barred permanent affiliation. The High Court held that the Registrar’s unilateral alteration was ultra vires, that AICTE’s yearly approval does not preclude permanent affiliation, and that the corrigendum and subsequent letter were illegal. Consequently, the court quashed the impugned communications, restored the recommendation for permanent affiliation, and directed the State Government to decide the matter within eight weeks. The writ petition was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether the Registrar of Patliputra University was justified in issuing the corrigendum and letter that changed the recommendation of permanent affiliation to temporary affiliation despite unanimous recommendations of the statutory bodies.
- Whether the annual Extension of Approval granted by AICTE constitutes a legal bar to granting permanent affiliation under Section 21(2)(d) of the Bihar State Universities Act, 1976.
- Whether the Registrar’s alteration of the affiliation recommendation without reasons or a hearing violates principles of natural justice.
Legislation cited
- Bihar State Universities Act, 1976 — s. 21(2)(d)
- Bihar State Universities Statutes — s. Statute No. 29
Subjects
- affiliation
- permanent affiliation
- temporary affiliation
- natural justice
- AICTE
- statutory bodies
- Bihar State Universities Act
- writ petition
- certiorari
- mandamus
- procedural fairness
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.14439 of 2025
======================================================
Catalyst College, Plot no. C-16 (P) Patliputra Industrial Area, Patna-800013,
through its Principal Neeraj Kumar Agarwal @ Neeraj Agarwal, Male, aged
about 41 Years, Son of Basant Kumar Agarwal, Resident of Big Bazar, H.no.
701, Gangotri Apartment, Exhibition Road, VTC- Phulwari, P.O.- Patna GP,
Sub District- Phulwari, District-Patna, 800001.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through Addl. Chief Secretary, Department of Education,
Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. Secretary-Cum-Director, High Education, Education Department,
Government of Bihar, Patna.
3. The Patliputra University through its Vice Chancellor, Old Bypass Road,
Kankarbagh, Patna-800020, Bihar (India).
4. The Registrar, Patliputra University, Old Bypass Road, Kankarbagh, Patna-
800020, Bihar (India).
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 14108 of 2025
======================================================
Catalyst Institute of Management and Advance Global Excellence commercial
plot No. 5, road No. 1A, Boring Road, District- Patna, 800001, through its
principal Nitish Kumar Rohatgi, Male, age about So Years, son of Sri Krishna
Kumar Rohatgi, Resident of Flat No. 203, Keshav Apartment, Kannulal Road,
P.S. Jakkanpur, District- Patna, 800001.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar through Addl. Chief Secretary, Department of Education,
Government of Bihar, Patna.
2. Secretary-cum- Director, High Education, Education Department,
Government of Bihar, Patna.
3. The Patliputra University through its Vice Chancellor, Old bypass Road,
Kankarbagh, Patna-800 020, Bihar (India).
4. The Registrar, Patlipurta University, Old bypass Road, Kankarbagh, Patna-
800 020, Bihar (India).
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
(In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 14439 of 2025)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mrigank Mauli, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Siddhartha Prasad, Adv.
Ms. Venkatesh Kirti, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr. K.P. Gupta, GP-10
Mr. Satya Vrat, AC to GP-10
Patna High Court CWJC No.14439 of 2025 dt.13-07-2026
2/33
For the PPU : Mr. Dr. Anand Kumar, Adv.
Md. Faiz Ahmad, Adv.
(In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 14108 of 2025)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Mrigank Mauli, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Siddarth Prasad, Adv.
Ms. Venkatesh Kirti, Adv.
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Government Pleader (11)
Mr. Dimpal Kumari, AC to GP-11
For the PPU : Mr. Dr. Anand Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Rabi Bhushan Prasad, Adv.
Md. Faiz Ahmad, Adv.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR SINHA
CAV JUDGMENT
Date : 13-07-2026
C.W.J.C. No. No.14108 of 2025
Heard the parties.
2. The petitioner has filed this writ application for the
grant of following reliefs:
“a.) For issuance of Writ in nature of
Certiorari quashing the Corrigendum bearing Ref.
No. R/PPU/946/25 dated 24.06.2025 where under
Patliputra University has granted extension/
temporary Affiliation to Petitioner College and
further reduces the seat from 240 to 120 for BCA
Course contrary to the recommendation of
Inspection Team constituted by University,
Affiliation and New Teaching Program Committee
dated 26.03.2025, Academic Council dated
28.03.2025 and Syndicate dated 29.03.2025 and
Council of University (Senate) dated 03.04.2025
wherein Petitioner college has been recommend
for permanent affiliation and enhancement of seat
from 120 to 240 in BCA course.
Patna High Court CWJC No.14439 of 2025 dt.13-07-2026
3/33
b.) For issuance of Writ in nature of
Mandamus directing the respondent University to
grant Permanent Affiliation in terms of its Letter
bearing Ref. No. INS/PPU/384/25 dated
14.06.2025 where under the Petitioner college
was granted permanent affiliation on the
recommendation of the Inspection Team
constituted by the University, Affiliation and New
Teaching Program Committee dated 26.03.2025,
Academic Council dated 28.03.2025, Syndicate
dated 29.03.2025 and Council of University
(Senate) dated 03.04.2025.
c.) For issuance of Writ in nature of
Mandamus directing the Respondent University to
increase the seat of BCA Course from 120 to 240
as per the recommendation of by the Inspection
Team constituted by University, Affiliation and
New Teaching Program Committee dated
26.03.2025, Academic Council dated 28.03.2025,
Syndicate dated 29.03.2025 and Council of
University (Senate) dated 03.04.2025.
d.) For any other relief or reliefs
which the petitioners may be found entitled to in
the facts and circumstances of the case.”
3. The learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits
that the petitioner is an affiliated college of Patliputra University
imparting technical and professional education. The petitioner was
initially affiliated with Magadh University, Bodh Gaya and, upon
the establishment of Patliputra University, its affiliation stood
Patna High Court CWJC No.14439 of 2025 dt.13-07-2026
4/33
transferred to the respondent University. It is submitted that the
petitioner was granted affiliation for one academic session in the
years 2020 and 2021 and, thereafter, pursuant to Memo No. 2225
dated 28.07.2022 issued by the Education Department,
Government of Bihar and Memo No. 2701/22 dated 24.11.2022
issued by the respondent University, the petitioner was granted
affiliation for three academic sessions, namely 2022-23, 2023-24
and 2024-25. Copies of the said communications have been
brought on record as Annexure P/1 (Series).
4. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner further
submits that after fulfilling all the statutory requirements
prescribed under the Bihar State University Act for grant of
permanent affiliation, the petitioner submitted an application dated
29.11.2024 before the respondent University seeking permanent
affiliation for the BBA, BCA and B.Sc.-IT courses and also
prayed for enhancement of intake in the BCA course from 120 to
240 seats. The said application has been annexed as Annexure P/2.
5. It is submitted that upon receipt of the aforesaid
application, the respondent University constituted an inspection
team, which inspected the petitioner institution. The inspection
report was thereafter placed before the 19th Affiliation and New
Teaching Programme Committee (ANTPC) in its meeting held on
Patna High Court CWJC No.14439 of 2025 dt.13-07-2026
5/33
26.03.2025. Learned counsel submits that upon consideration of
the inspection report, the ANTPC recommended grant of
permanent affiliation to the petitioner institution and also
approved enhancement of intake in the BCA course from 120 to
240 seats. The minutes of the said meeting have been annexed as
Annexure-P/3. It is further submitted that the recommendation of
the ANTPC was thereafter placed before the 16th Academic
Council in its meeting dated 28.03.2025, which approved the
proposal through Resolution No. 16.2, thereby accepting the
recommendation for grant of permanent affiliation to the
petitioner and enhancement of intake in the BCA course. The
proceedings of the Academic Council have been brought on
record as Annexure P/4.
6. Learned senior counsel further submits that the
matter was thereafter considered by the 25th Meeting of the
Syndicate held on 29.03.2025. The Syndicate approved the
proposal of the ANTPC through Resolution No. 25:4. Although
the Syndicate resolved that requests for permanent affiliation be
re-examined and, if found in accordance with the Rules,
forwarded to the State Government, the said proceedings have
been annexed as Annexure P/5.
Patna High Court CWJC No.14439 of 2025 dt.13-07-2026
6/33
It is submitted that the decision of the Syndicate was
subsequently placed before the 9th Meeting of the Senate held on
03.04.2025 under the Chairmanship of the Vice-Chancellor as
authorized by the Hon'ble Chancellor. Learned counsel submits
that the Senate modified the relevant portion of Resolution No.
25:4 by rejecting the proposal for re-examination and approved
grant of permanent affiliation to the petitioner institution along
with enhancement of intake in the BCA course from 120 to 240
seats. The proceedings of the Senate have been annexed as
Annexure P/6.
7. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner submits
that in pursuance of the aforesaid recommendations of the
ANTPC, Academic Council, Syndicate and Senate, the respondent
University issued Letter bearing Ref. No. INS/PPU/384/25 dated
14.06.2025 granting permanent affiliation to the petitioner
institution with enhancement of intake in the BCA course from
120 to 240 seats and forwarded the matter to the State
Government for final approval. The said communication has been
brought on record as Annexure P/7.
It is further submitted that, however, the respondent
Registrar of the University, by issuing Corrigendum bearing Ref.
No. 946/25 dated 24.06.2025, withdrew the earlier decision and
Patna High Court CWJC No.14439 of 2025 dt.13-07-2026
7/33
changed the status of the petitioner institution from permanent
affiliation to temporary affiliation. It is further submitted that the
corrigendum also reduced the approved intake in the BCA course
from 240 seats to 120 seats. According to the petitioner, the said
corrigendum was issued without assigning any reason and
contrary to the recommendations and resolutions of the statutory
bodies of the University, namely the ANTPC, Academic Council,
Syndicate and Senate. The corrigendum has been annexed as
Annexure P/8.
8. Learned senior counsel submits that being aggrieved
by the aforesaid action, the petitioner submitted a representation
dated 21.07.2025 before the Vice-Chancellor requesting
withdrawal of the corrigendum and restoration of the decision
granting permanent affiliation in accordance with the
recommendations of the statutory bodies. The said representation
has been annexed as Annexure P/9. It is further submitted that
during the pendency of the matter, the petitioner also applied
before the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) for
extension of recognition/approval for the academic session 2025-
26. It is submitted that the AICTE, by Corrigendum dated
31.07.2025, approved an intake of 240 seats in the BCA course
Patna High Court CWJC No.14439 of 2025 dt.13-07-2026
8/33
and 120 seats in the BBA course. A copy of the said approval has
been brought on record as Annexure P/10.
9. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner further
submits that in view of the approval granted by the AICTE, the
petitioner addressed representations dated 05.08.2025 to the
Hon'ble Chancellor, the Vice-Chancellor of the respondent
University and the Education Department requesting withdrawal
of the corrigendum dated 24.06.2025 and restoration of the
decision granting permanent affiliation. Copies of the said
representations have been annexed as Annexure P/11 (Series). On
the aforesaid factual foundation, learned senior counsel for the
petitioner submits that the impugned corrigendum dated
24.06.2025 is wholly arbitrary, illegal and unsustainable in law,
being contrary to the recommendations and resolutions of the
statutory bodies constituted under the Bihar State University Act.
It is contended that once the competent statutory bodies had
recommended and approved grant of permanent affiliation and
enhancement of intake, the respondent Registrar of the University
had no authority in law to unilaterally issue the impugned
corrigendum without assigning any reason or affording an
opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. It is further submitted that
the action of the respondent Registrar of the University is violative
Patna High Court CWJC No.14439 of 2025 dt.13-07-2026
9/33
of the principles of natural justice, suffers from arbitrariness, and
infringes Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India.
Accordingly, the petitioner seeks quashing of the corrigendum
dated 24.06.2025 and consequential restoration of the decision
granting permanent affiliation along with enhancement of intake
in the BCA course.
10. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner further
submits that during the pendency of the writ petition, the
respondent Registrar of the University issued another Letter No.
R/PPU/1476/25 dated 28.08.2025, whereby it recommended
affiliation to the petitioner institution only for the academic
session 2025-26, instead of granting permanent affiliation as
recommended by the Inspection Team, ANTPC, Academic
Council, Syndicate and Senate. Being aggrieved by the said
subsequent development, the petitioner has preferred an
interlocutory application bearing I.A. No.01 of 2025 seeking to
challenge the aforesaid communication. A copy thereof has been
brought on record as Annexure P/12.
11. Learned senior counsel further submits that the
respondent Registrar of the University has erroneously proceeded
on the premise that permanent affiliation cannot be granted in the
absence of permanent recognition/approval from the AICTE. It is
Patna High Court CWJC No.14439 of 2025 dt.13-07-2026
10/33
contended that the AICTE does not grant permanent approval or
recognition to technical institutions but only grants Extension of
Approval (EoA) on an yearly basis in terms of the Approval
Process Handbook. Consequently, the annual nature of AICTE
approval cannot constitute a valid ground to deny permanent
affiliation under the Bihar State Universities Act.
It is further submitted that the petitioner institution had
already been found fit for grant of permanent affiliation by the
Inspection Team, and the said recommendation was successively
approved by the ANTPC (Annexure P/3), Academic Council
(Annexure P/4), Syndicate (Annexure P/5) and Senate (Annexure
P/6), pursuant to which the University itself issued Letter No.
INS/PPU/384/25 dated 14.06.2025 granting permanent affiliation
(Annexure P/7). It is contended that thereafter the respondent
Registrar of the University lacked jurisdiction to dilute or alter the
decision of the statutory bodies of the University by issuing a
contrary communication.
12. Learned senior counsel further submits that the
impugned actions are also in violation of Statute No. 29 of the
Bihar State Universities Statutes, as the petitioner was neither
assigned any reasons for denial of permanent affiliation nor
afforded any opportunity of hearing before issuance of the
Patna High Court CWJC No.14439 of 2025 dt.13-07-2026
11/33
impugned communication. A copy of Statute No. 29 has been
annexed as Annexure P/14. Accordingly, the petitioner seeks
quashing of the corrigendum dated 24.06.2025 and consequential
restoration of the decision granting permanent affiliation along
with enhancement of intake in the BCA course. It is also
submitted that Letter No. R/PPU/1476/25 dated 28.08.2025,
restricting the petitioner's affiliation to the academic session 2025-
26, is arbitrary, illegal and contrary to the recommendations of the
statutory authorities of the University and, therefore, deserves to
be quashed.
13. At this stage, it is relevant to point out that during
the course of argument it was pointed out by learned Senior
Counsel appearing for the petitioner that the grievance with regard
to enhancement of intake in the BCA course from 120 to 240 seats
has already been redressed, which is not disputed by the learned
counsel appearing for the University. In such view of the matter,
this Court refrains from discussing the submissions made by the
parties on the issue of enhancement of seats.
14. Per Contra, learned counsel appearing on behalf
of Respondent No. 1 & 2-State submits, at the outset, that the writ
petition, as framed, does not seek any relief against the State
Government. It is contended that although the petitioner had
Patna High Court CWJC No.14439 of 2025 dt.13-07-2026
12/33
submitted before this Court on 25.09.2025 that inaction on the part
of the State authorities in granting approval for permanent
affiliation had prejudicially affected the institution and prevented
registration of students for the academic session 2025-26, no
corresponding relief has been prayed against the State. It is,
therefore, submitted that the stand taken by the petitioner during
the course of hearing is inconsistent with the reliefs sought in the
writ petition.
15. Learned counsel further submits that the Education
Department, with a view to examining the grievance raised by the
petitioner, issued Letter No. 2825 dated 22.07.2025 and Letter No.
3142 dated 02.09.2025 calling upon the Registrar of the
respondent University to furnish a report regarding the issues
raised in the present writ petition. Copies of the said
communications have been brought on record as Annexure R/1
(Series).
It is further submitted that, in response thereto, the
respondent University furnished its report vide Ref. No.
R/PPU/1476/25 dated 28.08.2025. According to the said report,
the petitioner institution had initially been granted approval by the
AICTE for conducting the BCA and BBA courses with an intake
of 120 seats each for the academic session 2025-26. It is stated
Patna High Court CWJC No.14439 of 2025 dt.13-07-2026
13/33
that, with effect from the academic session 2024-25, compliance
with the norms prescribed by the AICTE for professional courses
such as BBA and BCA is mandatory.
16. Learned counsel submits that the University
further clarified that the AICTE, by its subsequent corrigendum
dated 31.07.2025, enhanced the approved intake in the BCA
course from 120 to 240 seats. Consequently, the University
recommended grant of permanent affiliation to the petitioner
institution for the B.Sc.-IT course with an intake of 120 seats from
the academic session 2025-26 and also recommended grant of
affiliation for the academic session 2025-26 in respect of the BCA
and BBA courses in terms of Section 21(2)(d) of the Bihar State
Universities Act, 1976. A copy of the University's report has been
annexed as Annexure R/2.
Learned counsel for the Respondent no. 1 and 2,
therefore, submits that the proposal/recommendation forwarded
by the respondent University is under consideration before the
Department and that an appropriate decision shall be taken
thereon in accordance with law.
17. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of
Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 (University), by way of supplementary
counter affidavit, submits that under Section 21(2)(d) of the Bihar
Patna High Court CWJC No.14439 of 2025 dt.13-07-2026
14/33
State Universities Act, 1976, the University, after inspection and
upon recommendations of the New Teaching Programme
Committee, Academic Council, Syndicate and Senate, is required
to forward the proposal for affiliation to the State Government,
and affiliation can be granted only after approval by the State
Government. It is further submitted that the petitioner institution
proposes to impart professional courses, namely BBA and BCA,
under the Self-Finance Scheme and that, although the Bihar State
Universities Act does not contain any specific provision governing
such courses, the State Government has issued guidelines
prescribing the requisite infrastructure, faculty and other norms
for grant of affiliation.
It is further submitted that till the academic session
2023-24, affiliation for such courses was granted in terms of the
State Government guidelines after approval under Section 21(2)
(d) of the Act. Thereafter, pursuant to the guidelines issued by the
AICTE requiring approval for institutions imparting BBA, BCA
and BBM courses, the Education Department, Government of
Bihar, vide Letter No. 193 dated 12.01.2024, directed all
Universities to ensure that AICTE approval is obtained before
granting affiliation for such courses. It is, therefore, contended
Patna High Court CWJC No.14439 of 2025 dt.13-07-2026
15/33
that affiliation can be granted only in accordance with the
approval granted by the AICTE.
18. Learned counsel further places reliance upon the
judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in L.P.A. No. 1288
of 2018 (Arpana Kumar & Ors. vs. State of Bihar & Ors.),
wherein it was observed that no admissions should be made
without approval of affiliation by the State Government under
Section 21(2)(d) of the Bihar State Universities Act. It is
accordingly submitted that affiliation can be granted only for the
academic session and intake approved by the AICTE.
19. Learned counsel for the University submits that the
Academic Council, Syndicate and Senate had recommended grant
of permanent affiliation to the petitioner institution and,
accordingly, the University forwarded its proposal vide Letter No.
384 dated 14.06.2025. However, since the proposal was not in
conformity with the intake approved by the AICTE, the Registrar
of the University issued the modified communication dated
24.06.2025, recommending temporary affiliation.
With regard to the petitioner's reliance upon the case of
Arcade Business College, learned counsel submits that the said
institution stood on a different footing, as it had already been
granted permanent affiliation by Magadh University prior to the
Patna High Court CWJC No.14439 of 2025 dt.13-07-2026
16/33
creation of Patliputra University. It is submitted that after the
establishment of Patliputra University, the permanent affiliation of
Arcade Business College was merely confirmed pursuant to the
orders passed by this Court in CWJC No. 11113 of 2017, CWJC
No. 11628 of 2017, and MJC No. 2776 of 2018, whereafter the
University issued communications dated 09.08.2018 and
06.10.2021. Copies thereof have been annexed as Annexures A
and B. It is further submitted that the State Government granted
post facto approval to such permanent affiliation vide letters dated
20.03.2023 and 13.04.2023, which have been brought on record as
Annexures C and D.
20. Lastly, learned counsel for the University submits
that after implementation of the AICTE Regulations from the
academic session 2024-25, the respondent University has not
forwarded any proposal for grant of permanent affiliation in
respect of institutions imparting AICTE-regulated courses and has
been granting affiliation only in accordance with the approval
granted by the AICTE and the approval of the State Government
under Section 21(2)(d) of the Act.
ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION:
1. Whether Registrar of the respondent University was
justified in law in issuing the impugned communications dated
Patna High Court CWJC No.14439 of 2025 dt.13-07-2026
17/33
24.06.2025 and 28.08.2025, whereby the recommendation for
permanent affiliation was modified to affiliation for a single
academic session, despite the unanimous recommendations of the
ANTPC, Academic Council, Syndicate and Senate (Statutory
Bodies of the University) in favour of grant of permanent
affiliation to the petitioner institution?
2. Whether the annual Extension of Approval (EoA) granted
by the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) for
professional courses constitutes a legal bar to the grant of
permanent affiliation under Section 21(2)(d) of the Bihar State
Universities Act, 1976?
3. Whether the impugned actions of the Registrar of the
respondent University in altering its earlier recommendation for
permanent affiliation granted by statutory bodies of the University
without assigning reasons or affording an opportunity of hearing
to the petitioner, is illegal, arbitrary, violative of the principles of
natural justice, and thus unsustainable in law?
FINDINGS:
1. Whether the Registrar of the respondent University was
justified in law in issuing the impugned communications dated
24.06.2025 and 28.08.2025, whereby the recommendation for
permanent affiliation was modified to affiliation for a single
Patna High Court CWJC No.14439 of 2025 dt.13-07-2026
18/33
academic session, despite the unanimous recommendations of
the ANTPC, Academic Council, Syndicate and Senate
(Statutory Bodies of the University) in favour of grant of
permanent affiliation to the petitioner institution?
Finding on issue no.1:
The answer to the aforesaid issue has to be found in the statutory
scheme governing grant of affiliation under the Bihar State
Universities Act, 1976. The materials brought on record reveal
that the proposal for grant of permanent affiliation to the petitioner
institution was not the outcome of an individual administrative
decision, but was the culmination of a structured statutory process.
The petitioner institution was duly inspected and its eligibility was
examined by the competent authorities constituted under the Act.
Upon satisfaction of the prescribed requirements, the Affiliation
and New Teaching Programme Committee (ANTPC)
recommended grant of permanent affiliation, which
recommendation thereafter received approval from the Academic
Council, the Syndicate and, finally, the Senate, the highest
statutory body of the University. Acting upon the resolutions of
these statutory authorities, the University itself forwarded the
proposal for grant of permanent affiliation to the State
Government vide Letter No. INS/PPU/384/25 dated 14.06.2025.
Patna High Court CWJC No.14439 of 2025 dt.13-07-2026
19/33
Once the statutory bodies of the University had
unanimously resolved to grant permanent affiliation and the
University had acted upon such resolutions by forwarding the
proposal to the State Government, the recommendations attained a
degree of institutional finality within the decision-making
framework of the University. At that stage, the role of the
University stood substantially exhausted, save and except to
facilitate consideration of the proposal by the State Government in
accordance with Section 21(2)(d) of the Act. The Registrar of the
University could not, in the absence of any express statutory
authority or any subsequent decision of the competent statutory
bodies, unilaterally alter the very recommendation which had
emanated from those bodies.
The impugned communication dated 24.06.2025 does
not disclose that the matter was reconsidered by the ANTPC,
Academic Council, Syndicate or Senate. There is nothing on
record to suggest that any of the statutory bodies revisited or
recalled their earlier resolutions. On the contrary, the modification
appears to have been made solely at the administrative level by
substituting the recommendation of permanent affiliation with
affiliation for a single academic session. Such an action, in the
opinion of this Court, is inconsistent with the statutory decision-
Patna High Court CWJC No.14439 of 2025 dt.13-07-2026
20/33
making mechanism envisaged under the Bihar State Universities
Act. An administrative authority cannot override or dilute a
decision validly taken by the competent statutory bodies unless
such power is specifically conferred by law.
The subsequent communication dated 28.08.2025 also
does not improve the position of the respondent University. Rather
than forwarding the recommendation for permanent affiliation
already approved by the statutory bodies, the Registrar of the
University recommended affiliation only for the academic session
2025-26. This communication, too, does not indicate that the
statutory bodies had reconsidered their earlier resolutions or
authorized the alteration in the nature of affiliation. Consequently,
the subsequent recommendation suffers from the same legal
infirmity as the earlier corrigendum.
The principal justification advanced by the respondent
University is that the proposal for permanent affiliation was
inadvertently forwarded without taking into consideration the
approval granted by the AICTE and, therefore, the corrigendum
was issued to bring the recommendation in conformity with the
AICTE approval. Such justification, however, cannot validate the
impugned action insofar as the present issue is concerned.
Whether the AICTE approval has any bearing upon the grant of
Patna High Court CWJC No.14439 of 2025 dt.13-07-2026
21/33
permanent affiliation is an independent legal question, which shall
be examined separately. Assuming that the Registrar of the
University perceived an inconsistency between its
recommendation and the AICTE approval, the proper course
available to it was to place the matter before the competent
statutory bodies for reconsideration or to bring the relevant facts
to the notice of the State Government while the proposal was
pending consideration. It could not, on its own, substitute the
collective decision of the statutory authorities with an
administrative decision.
The contention of the respondents that the matter was
still pending before the State Government also does not advance
their case. Pendency of the proposal before the State Government
cannot bestow powers on the Registrar of the University to modify
or withdraw recommendation of the statutory bodies of the
University dehors the procedure prescribed under the Act. Once
the proposal had been forwarded in terms of the resolutions passed
by the statutory bodies, any departure therefrom necessarily
required reconsideration by those very authorities. No such
exercise having been undertaken, the impugned communications
cannot be sustained on the basis of mere administrative
expediency.
Patna High Court CWJC No.14439 of 2025 dt.13-07-2026
22/33
This Court is, therefore, of the considered view that the
Registrar of the respondent University acted beyond the scope of
its authority in issuing the communications dated 24.06.2025 and
28.08.2025, whereby the recommendation for permanent
affiliation was substituted with affiliation for a single academic
session without there being any reconsideration or approval by the
competent statutory bodies. The impugned communications, to
that extent, are contrary to the statutory scheme governing
affiliation under the Bihar State Universities Act, 1976 and cannot
be held to be legally justified.
Accordingly, Issue No. I is answered in favour of the
petitioner.
2. Whether the annual Extension of Approval (EoA)
granted by the All India Council for Technical Education
(AICTE) for professional courses constitutes a legal bar to the
grant of permanent affiliation under Section 21(2)(d) of the
Bihar State Universities Act, 1976?
Finding on Issue No.2:
The principal justification advanced by the respondent-
University for issuing the impugned communications is that the
petitioner institution had been granted approval by the AICTE
only for the academic session 2025-26 and, therefore, permanent
Patna High Court CWJC No.14439 of 2025 dt.13-07-2026
23/33
affiliation could not have been recommended. According to the
respondent-University, after implementation of the AICTE
regulatory framework, the University is required to ensure that
affiliation is granted only in consonance with the approval
accorded by the AICTE. The petitioner, on the other hand,
contends that the AICTE grants only annual Extension of
Approval (EoA) and not permanent approval, and, therefore, the
annual nature of such approval cannot, by itself, disentitle an
institution from being considered for permanent affiliation under
the Bihar State Universities Act.
This Court finds that the controversy essentially arises from
a conflation of two distinct statutory concepts.
Approval/Recognition granted by the AICTE and affiliation
granted under the Bihar State Universities Act operate in separate,
though interrelated, fields. While the AICTE regulates technical
education by prescribing standards relating to infrastructure,
faculty, intake and other academic requirements, the University
exercises its statutory power of affiliation to bring an institution
within its academic fold for the purposes contemplated under the
Act. Both are indispensable, yet neither is a substitute for the
other.
Patna High Court CWJC No.14439 of 2025 dt.13-07-2026
24/33
The annual Extension of Approval granted by the AICTE is
a regulatory mechanism devised to ensure continued compliance
with the standards prescribed by it. The fact that such approval is
renewed from year to year does not, by itself, imply that an
institution is incapable of being granted permanent affiliation
under the University Act. Significantly, no provision of the Bihar
State Universities Act, 1976 has been brought to the notice of this
Court which mandates that permanent affiliation can be granted
only where the regulatory approval of the AICTE is itself
permanent. Equally, no provision of the AICTE Act or the
Regulations has been shown which prohibits the grant of
permanent affiliation by the University merely because the AICTE
follows the mechanism of annual Extension of Approval.
At the same time, the significance of the AICTE
approval/recognition cannot be diluted. The University and the
State Government are under a legal obligation to ensure that
affiliation does not exceed the regulatory approval/recognition
granted by the AICTE in respect of the courses conducted and the
intake permitted. Thus, while the nature of affiliation may be
permanent, the actual conduct of courses, intake of students and
continuation of admissions must necessarily remain consistent
with the approval granted by the AICTE for the relevant academic
Patna High Court CWJC No.14439 of 2025 dt.13-07-2026
25/33
sessions. The requirement of obtaining periodic Extension of
Approval, therefore, governs the operational aspects of the
institution and cannot be construed as extinguishing the statutory
concept of permanent affiliation.
The subsequent enhancement of the petitioner's intake in the
BCA course by the AICTE vide communication dated 31.07.2025
further demonstrates that the regulatory approval granted by the
AICTE is dynamic and capable of variation depending upon
compliance with its norms. Such variations may warrant
corresponding modifications in the number of seats or courses that
may be offered by the institution for a particular academic session.
However, they do not, in themselves, determine whether the
institution is entitled to permanent affiliation under the Bihar State
Universities Act.
Accordingly, this Court is of the considered opinion that the
annual Extension of Approval (EoA) granted by the AICTE does
not constitute a legal bar to the grant of permanent affiliation
under Section 21(2)(d) of the Bihar State Universities Act, 1976.
The grant of permanent affiliation and the grant of regulatory
approval/recognition by the AICTE are complementary statutory
requirements, each operating within its respective spheres. The
former cannot be denied solely on account of the annual nature of
Patna High Court CWJC No.14439 of 2025 dt.13-07-2026
26/33
the latter, though the exercise and continuance of the rights
flowing from affiliation must necessarily remain in conformity
with the approval/recognition granted by the AICTE from time to
time.
3. Whether the impugned actions of the Registrar of the
respondent University in altering its earlier recommendation
for permanent affiliation granted by Statutory Bodies of the
University without assigning reasons or affording an
opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, is illegal, arbitrary,
violative of the principles of natural justice, and thus
unsustainable in law?
The principles of natural justice constitute an integral facet
of fair administrative action. It is now well settled that whenever
an administrative decision has the effect of curtailing or
withdrawing an existing benefit or adversely affecting the rights or
legitimate expectations of a person, such decision must satisfy the
requirements of procedural fairness. Unless expressly excluded by
statute or where the nature of the action itself admits of no prior
hearing, an authority is ordinarily required to disclose the reasons
for its proposed action and afford the affected party an opportunity
of being heard.
Patna High Court CWJC No.14439 of 2025 dt.13-07-2026
27/33
In the present case, the petitioner institution had already
undergone the statutory process of inspection and evaluation,
pursuant to which the competent statutory bodies of the
University successively recommended grant of permanent
affiliation. Acting upon those recommendations, the University
itself forwarded the proposal to the State Government vide Letter
No. INS/PPU/384/25 dated 14.06.2025 recommending permanent
affiliation. The subsequent communications dated 24.06.2025 and
28.08.2025 materially altered the petitioner's position by
substituting the recommendation for permanent affiliation with
affiliation confined to a single academic session. Such alteration
undoubtedly carried adverse civil consequences, as it directly
impacted the petitioner's academic status and its entitlement to
seek permanent affiliation.
A perusal of the impugned communications reveal that
they do not disclose any cogent reasons for departing from the
earlier decision taken on the basis of the recommendations of the
statutory bodies. The communication dated 24.06.2025 merely
substitutes the earlier recommendation without indicating the
circumstances which necessitated such departure. Even the
subsequent communication dated 28.08.2025 does not disclose
any independent reasoning but merely reflects the modified
Patna High Court CWJC No.14439 of 2025 dt.13-07-2026
28/33
recommendation forwarded to the State Government. The reasons
now sought to be advanced by the respondents in their counter
affidavits, namely that the modification was necessitated on
account of the AICTE approval, cannot cure the defect in the
original decision. It is trite that the validity of an administrative
order has to be judged on the reasons contained therein and
cannot be supplemented by fresh reasons subsequently disclosed
through affidavits.
Equally significant is the fact that no material has been
placed on record to indicate that the petitioner was put to notice
before the impugned communications were issued. No show-
cause notice was issued, no opportunity was afforded to explain
the petitioner's position, and no hearing preceded the decision to
alter the recommendation for permanent affiliation. The
respondents have also not pointed out any provision under the
Bihar State Universities Act or the Statutes excluding the
application of the principles of natural justice in the present
circumstances. On the contrary, where an authority proposes to
withdraw or substantially modify an earlier decision conferring a
benefit upon an institution, adherence to the principles of natural
justice assumes greater significance.
Patna High Court CWJC No.14439 of 2025 dt.13-07-2026
29/33
The respondents have sought to justify the impugned
action by contending that the modification was made to bring the
University's recommendation in conformity with the approval
granted by the AICTE. Even assuming such justification to be
available, it did not dispense with the obligation to adopt a fair
decision-making process. Administrative convenience or
perceived urgency cannot be invoked to bypass the fundamental
requirement of procedural fairness, particularly when the action
results in adverse civil consequences for the affected institution.
The impugned action also falls foul of the requirement
that administrative decisions must be reasoned. Recording of
reasons is not an empty formality; it ensures transparency,
facilitates judicial review and demonstrates that the authority has
applied its mind to the relevant considerations. An unreasoned
decision which reverses an earlier recommendation approved by
the statutory authorities of the University cannot withstand
judicial scrutiny merely because an explanation is furnished
during the course of litigation.
In view of the foregoing discussion, this Court is of the
considered opinion that the respondent University, while altering
its earlier recommendation for permanent affiliation, failed to
adhere to the minimum requirements of procedural fairness. The
Patna High Court CWJC No.14439 of 2025 dt.13-07-2026
30/33
impugned communications were issued without disclosing
adequate reasons and without affording the petitioner an
opportunity of hearing, thereby rendering the decision-making
process arbitrary and violative of the principles of natural justice.
21. In view of the discussions made hereinabove, this
Court is of the considered opinion that the respondent Registrar of
the University was not justified in unilaterally modifying its
earlier recommendation for grant of permanent affiliation, which
had been approved by the ANTPC, Academic Council, Syndicate
and Senate, by issuing the impugned communications dated
24.06.2025 and 28.08.2025. The annual Extension of Approval
(EoA) granted by the AICTE cannot, by itself, constitute a legal
impediment to the grant of permanent affiliation under the Bihar
State Universities Act, 1976. At the same time, the regulatory
approval granted by the AICTE remains an essential statutory
requirement governing the courses, intake and academic
operations of the institution. Consequently, while the petitioner
cannot be denied consideration for permanent affiliation solely on
account of the annual nature of AICTE approval, the benefits
flowing from such affiliation must necessarily operate within the
regulatory framework prescribed by the AICTE from time to
time.
Patna High Court CWJC No.14439 of 2025 dt.13-07-2026
31/33
22. Accordingly, the impugned Corrigendum/Letter
No. R/PPU/946/25 dated 24.06.2025 and Letter No.
R/PPU/1476/25 dated 28.08.2025 are hereby quashed and set
aside. The recommendation of the respondent University
contained in Letter No. INS/PPU/384/25 dated 14.06.2025,
whereby permanent affiliation was recommended in favour of the
petitioner institution, shall stand restored and shall be processed
by the respondent State authorities in accordance with law. It is,
however, made clear that such permanent affiliation shall remain
subject to the petitioner institution obtaining and maintaining the
requisite approval/Extension of Approval (EoA) from the AICTE
from time to time, and the petitioner shall be entitled to admit
students and conduct courses only to the extent permitted under
the approval granted by the AICTE for the relevant academic
session. The respondent State Government shall take a final
decision on the restored proposal for permanent affiliation, in the
light of the observations made hereinabove, preferably within a
period of eight weeks from the date of receipt/production of a
copy of this judgment.
23. The writ petition stands allowed in the aforesaid
terms. All pending I.As, if any, stands disposed of. There shall be
no order as to costs.
Patna High Court CWJC No.14439 of 2025 dt.13-07-2026
32/33
CWJC No.14439 of 2025
Heard the parties.
2. Since the petitioner of this case is similarly situated as
the petitioner of CWJC No.14108 of 2025 and the facts, issues
involved as well as reliefs claimed are also similar in nature,
therefore, this writ application is also allowed in terms of the
aforesaid judgment delivered in CWJC No. 14108 of 2025.
3. Accordingly, in view of the discussions made
hereinabove and for the reasons recorded while answering the
issues framed by this Court, the writ petition deserves to be
allowed. Accordingly, the impugned Corrigendum/Letter No.
R/PPU/945/25 dated 24.06.2025 and Letter No. R/PPU/1476/25
dated 28.08.2025 are hereby quashed and set aside. The
recommendation of the respondent University contained in Letter
No. INS/PPU/383/25 dated 14.06.2025, whereby permanent
affiliation was recommended in favour of the petitioner institution,
shall stand restored and shall be processed by the respondent State
authorities in accordance with law. It is, however, made clear that
such permanent affiliation shall remain subject to the petitioner
institution obtaining and maintaining the requisite
approval/Extension of Approval (EoA) from the AICTE from time
to time, and the petitioner shall be entitled to admit students and
Patna High Court CWJC No.14439 of 2025 dt.13-07-2026
33/33
conduct courses only to the extent permitted under the approval
granted by the AICTE for the relevant academic session. The
respondent State Government shall take a final decision on the
restored proposal for permanent affiliation, in the light of the
observations made hereinabove, preferably within a period of eight
weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this
judgment.
4. The writ petition is, accordingly, allowed in the
aforesaid terms. All pending I.As, if any, stands disposed of.
However, there shall be no order as to costs.
(Alok Kumar Sinha, J)
Prakash Narayan
AFR/NAFR AFR
CAV DATE 30.06.2026
Uploading Date 13.07.2026
Transmission Date NA
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.