MISS HARPREET KAUR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) For the view I am taking in the matter, it is not necessary to advert to the facts in any detail. Suffice it to mention that vide office order dated 17.10.1992 (Annexure P/5), the Director-Principal of C.R State College of Engineering, Murthal respondent No. 2, informed the petitioner and others concerned that in the terms of M.D. University, Rohtak letter dated 16.10.1992, migration of the petitioner was being made from Priyadarshni College of Engineering, Nagpur to C.R. State College of Engineering, Murthal on provisional basis in B.E. 2nd year in Electronics & Communication Engineering Branch subject to her submitting migration certificate from the University of Nagpur within 20 days from the date of issue of the order and further the petitioner was directed to deposit fee with the cashier. The petitioner in pursuance the said order, deposited fee on 19.10.1992. She was allotted Roll Number and was also given a seat in the hostel.

(2.) It is the case of the petitioner that she obtained migration certificate from the University of Nagpur on 20.10.1992, but before it could be submitted to the authorities concerned, the Principal on 21.10.1992 (Annexure P/10) Tote to her on the basis of a letter of the Commissioner-cum-Secretary to Government Haryana dated 20.10.1992 that the provisional approval regarding migration granted vide letter dated 17.10.1992 (Annexure P/5) was being withdrawn and also the provisional admission in B.E. 2nd year Electronics & Communication Engineering to the collage stands cancelled. The present writ petition challenging order dated 21.10.1992 (Annexure P/10) was filed on 24.10.1992, which came up for hearing on 28.10.1992 when notice of motion was issued and ultimately it was admitted on 13.11.1992. It was ordered by way of interim arrangement that the petitioner would pursue her studies at C.R. State College of Engineering at her own risk, which would be subject to the decision of the writ petition.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has raised the following points to assail communication of withdrawal of approval of migration dated 21.10.1992 (Annexure P/10); 1) Before approval to migrate was granted the petitioner had placed before the respondent all the facts and had not concealed any fact from the authorities and in any case the authorities knew all the facts before granting approval for the migration. Consequently the doctrine of promissory estoppel would come into play against the respondents and they cannot now withdraw the approval. The approval had been granted only subject to her submitting the migration certificate from the Nagpur University, which the petitioner had obtained on 20.10.1992; 2) The impugned order entails civil consequences inasmuch as the petitioner got her admission cancelled from Nagpur University and if the impughned order is allowed to stand, she would neither get admission in the Nagpur University nor in C.R. State College of Engineering, Murthal. According to the counsel, such an order could not have been passed without affording any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner; 3) The order withdrawing the approval regardmg migration does not disclose any reasons whatsoever. It being a non-speaking order is liable to be quashed; 4) The M.D. University has not withdrawn the approval regarding migration granted vide letter dated 15.10.1992 (Annexure P/3) and consequently, respondent Nos. 1 & 2 had no jurisdiction to withdraw the approval.