1988 (3) TMI 452 - SC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Constitutional validity of Bihar Ordinances Nos. 15 of 1986 and 30 of 1986 and the Bihar Private Educational Institutions (Taking over) Act, 1987.
2. Legality of the termination of Dr. Jagadanand Jha's service as Registrar of Lalit Narayan Mishra Institute of Economic Development and Social Change.

Summary:

1. Constitutional Validity of the Act and Ordinances:
The Lalit Narayan Mishra Institute of Economic Development and Social Change, Patna, challenged the constitutional validity of Bihar Ordinances Nos. 15 of 1986 and 30 of 1986, replaced by the Bihar Private Educational Institutions (Taking over) Act, 1987. The petitioners argued that the Act violated Article 14 of the Constitution by singling out the Institute for nationalization without a reasonable basis. The Court held that the Act did not violate Article 14 as it aimed to nationalize private educational institutions in phases, starting with the Institute. The legislative decision to nationalize the Institute first was justified due to the State's significant financial and administrative involvement in the Institute since 1975. The Court rejected the argument that the Act violated Article 19(1)(c), stating that the right to form an association does not extend to the activities or objects of the association. The Act did not interfere with the Society's composition or its right to form an association. The Court also found that the Act fell within the legislative competence of the State Legislature under Entry 42 of List III, pertaining to the acquisition and requisition of property.

2. Legality of Termination of Dr. Jagadanand Jha's Service:
Dr. Jagadanand Jha's service as Registrar was terminated by an order dated April 21, 1986, under the provisions of the ordinance. The Court found that the termination was done in haste without properly applying the mind and without giving Dr. Jha a reasonable opportunity to be heard. The Court held that the principles of natural justice required that Dr. Jha be given an opportunity to make a representation before his services were terminated. Consequently, the Court quashed the termination order and allowed the writ petitions and civil appeal related to Dr. Jha's termination. The State Government was given the liberty to reconsider the termination after giving Dr. Jha a reasonable opportunity to be heard.

Conclusion:
The Court dismissed the writ petitions and civil appeal challenging the constitutional validity of the ordinances and the Act. However, it allowed the writ petitions and civil appeal related to the termination of Dr. Jagadanand Jha's service, quashing the termination order and directing the State Government to reconsider the matter after giving him a reasonable opportunity to make a representation. There was no order for costs in any of these matters.