Case: D.A.V. College &amp; Others Vs. State of Punjab &amp; Others

2. The Managing Committee of the D.A.V. Collage is composed of 24 members and manages a score of other D.A.V. Institutions established in the country. The D.A.V. Collage Trust and the Managing Society was formed to perpetuate the memory of Swami Dayanand Saraswati who was the founder of an organisation known as Arya Samaj, which organisation it is claimed has a fixed religious programme and its constitution is designed to perpetuate the religious teaching and philosophy of its founder. The Arya Samaj it is stated has its own philosophy conception of God worship, religious tenets, rituals, social work, educational work etc., as would appear from the constitution of the Arya Samaj. It is, therefore, claimed that it being a religious sect and denomination, is a minority within the meaning of Article 50(1) of the Constitution. The Schools and Collages were established on the lines, teachings and principles of Arya Samaj in which the imparting of the Vedic culture and religious instruction and worship based on the concept of Vedas, was and has its essential ingredient.3. The Institutions which have filed the Writ Petitions were before the Punjab Reorganisation Act (hereinafter called the Reorganisation Act) affiliated to the Punjab University constituted under the East Punjab Act, 7 of 1947 (hereinafter called the Punjab University or the Punjab University Act as the context admits). Before the partition of India some of these Institutions were affiliated to the Punjab University, Lahore. After the partition other Universities were set up in Punjab State like the Punjab University, the Kurukshetra University, the Agricultural University etc., each of which had its own territorial jurisdiction4. There being a strong movement in the state of Punjab by the Sikhs to have a State of their own and others who did not want it, the Government of India being faced with this problem ultimately decided to reorganise the State of Punjab on linguistic basis. A Boundary Commission was appointed under the Chairmanship of Shah, J. as he then was, and on the basis of that report Parliament ultimately passed the Reorganisation Act by and under which the State of Punjab and the State of Haryana were formed and certain other territories were added to Himachal Pradesh. Chandigarh, the erstwhile capital was to be a Union territory and was to serve as capital of both these States. A provision was made in this Act for the continuance of certain Corporations and Institutions which had served the needs of the people of both areas to continue as heretofore subject to the special provisions enacted in the Act. Three of such institutions were the Punjab University, the Punjab Agricultural University and the Board constituted under the provisions of Part III of Sikh Gurdwaras Act, 1925. The continuance of the aforementioned two Universities was dealt alongwith other statutory Corporation under the general provisions contained in Section 72 of the Reorganisation Act.As already pointed out at the time of the reorganisation of the State other Universities other than the University of Punjab were in existence namely the Punjab University in Punjab, and Kurukshetra University in Haryana. After the reorganisation the various Colleges which were in the State of Punjab other than those over which the Punjab University had jurisdiction were continued to be affiliated to the Punjab University. While this was the position till 1969 the Punjab Legislature in order to mark the 500th Birth anniversary of Shri Guru Nanak Devji established a University to perpetuate his name. The Act received the assent of the Governor on November 28, 1969. On March 16, 1970 the first Respondent in exercise of the powers conferred on it by sub-section (1) of Section 5 of the Act specified the districts of Amritsar, Gurdaspur, Jullundur and Kapurthala in the State of Punjab as the area in which the University shall exercise its power and perform its duties. It further notified on March 16, 1970, in exercise of the powers under sub-section (3) of section 5, June 30, 1970, as the date for the purpose of the said sub-section in respect of the educational institutions situated within the limits of the aforesaid area, which meant that as and from that date the colleges in the areas specified above which were affiliated to the Punjab University ceased to be affiliated to that University and were deemed to be associated with and admitted to the privileges of the University.

Reasoning: This argument however overlooks the basis tents of the sect in that it admits to membership only those Hindus who subscribe to the decalogue and its beliefs in the canons of Vedic interpretation laid down by Swami Dayanand but all outsiders who are non-Hindus such as Muslims and Christians must undergo a ceremony of purification or ShudhiIn our view there is no possible justification for the provisions contained in Clauses 2(1)(a) and 17 of Chapter V of the statutes which decidedly interfere with the rights of management of the petitioners colleges. These provisions cannot therefore be made as conditions of affiliation, the non-compliance of which would involve disaffiliation and consequently they will have to be struck done as offending Article 30(1)Clause 18 however in our view does not suffer from the same vice as Clause 17 because that provision in so far as it is applicable to the minority institution empowers the University to prescribe by regulations governing the service and conduct of teachers which is enacted in the larger interests of the institutions to ensure their efficiency and excellence. It may for instance issue an ordinance in respect of age of superannuation or prescribe minimum qualifications for teachers to be employed by such institutions either generally or in particular subjects. Uniformity in the conditions of service and conduct of teachers in all non-Government colleges would make for harmony and avoid frustration. Of course while the power to make ordinances in respect of the matters referred to is unexceptional the nature of the infringement of the right, if any, under Article 30(1) will depend on the actual purpose and import of the ordinance when made and the manner in which it is likely to affect the administration of the educational institution, about which it is not possible now to predicateIt is apparent therefore that the validity or the invalidity of the impugned law, on the ground of legislative competence should purport to infringe that fundamental rights of the petitioner as a necessary condition of its being adjudicated. But if in fact the law does not, even on the assumption that it is valid, infringe and fundamental rights, this Court will not decide that question in a petition under Article 32. The reason for it is obvious, namely that no petition under Article 32, will be entertained if fundamental rights are not affected and if the impugned law does not affect the fundamental rights it would be contrary to this principle to determine whether that law in fact has legislative competence or notThis being the legal position in our view when once an impugned law does not affect the fundamental rights of the petitioners as in this case we have founded it to be so, it is not necessary to go into the question of legislative competence or to decide on the validity of Section 550. We havetherefore no hesitation in holding that the notification under which the colleges have been affiliated to the Universities is legally valid and from the date specified therein petitioners colleges cease to be affiliated to the Punjab University.