Khalsa University and Another vs The State of Punjab and Another

Held: It is a settled position of law that though a legislation affecting a single entity or a single undertaking or a single person would be permissible in law, it must be on the basis of reasonable classification having nexus with the object to be achieved – There should be a reasonable differentia on the basis of which a person, entity or undertaking is sought to be singled out from the rest of the group – Further, if a legislation affecting a single person, entity or undertaking is being enacted, there should be special circumstances requiring such an enactment – Such special circumstances should be gathered from the material taken into consideration by the competent legislature and shall include the Parliamentary/Legislative Debates – Also, wherever this Court has upheld the legislation affecting the single entity, institution or undertaking, it found that it was done in emergent and extreme circumstances preceded by enquiries, parliamentary debates, etc. – It was done when the legislature took into consideration the relevant material and found it expedient to do so – In the instant case, the impugned Act is a single entity legislation repealing the 2016 Act by which the Khalsa University was established – The Khalsa University has specifically averred that it has been singled out by the State Government amongst 16 Universities – It has also been averred that there is absolutely no reason or justification whereby the Khalsa University could be ordered to be shut down in such a discriminatory manner – The reply filed by the respondent no.1 does not deal with the submissions made by the appellants on the ground of discrimination – No material is placed on record as to what was the compelling and emergent situation so as to enact a law which could affect the Khalsa University (appellant No.1) – No material is placed on record to show that there were any discussions prior to the Impugned Act being passed or as to what material was placed and taken into consideration by the competent legislature – Since the Khalsa University had specifically pleaded a ground regarding discrimination, it was incumbent upon the respondents to have dealt with the said challenge – Therefore, the Impugned Act singled out the Khalsa University (appellant No.1) amongst 16 private Universities in the State and no reasonable classification has been pointed out to discriminate the Khalsa University (appellant No.1) against the other private Universities – The Impugned Act therefore would be discriminatory and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. [Paras 48, 53, 58, 59]

Khalsa University (Repeal) Act, 2017 – Constitution of India – Art.14 – Whether the Impugned Act (Khalsa University (Repeal) Act, 2017) is liable to be struck down on the ground of manifest arbitrariness:

Held: The only reasoning given in the Statement of Objects and Reasons of the Impugned Act is that the Khalsa College has, over a period of time, become a significant icon of Khalsa heritage and the University established in 2016 is likely to shadow and damage its character and pristine glory – It is to be noted that the Khalsa College which was established in 1892 is not a part of the Khalsa University – During the course of hearing, a specific statement has been made by the appellants that the Khalsa College would not be affiliated with the Khalsa University – The maps have been placed on record which show the placement of Khalsa College in the campus along with the other institutions – The perusal of the said map would clearly reveal that it is only the Khalsa College established in 1892 which is a heritage one – All other buildings have been subsequently constructed having no resemblance with the Khalsa College building – It can thus be seen that the very foundation that Khalsa University would shadow and damage the character and pristine glory of Khalsa College which has, over a period of time, become a significant icon of Khalsa heritage is on a non-existent basis – It could thus be seen that the Impugned Act, which was enacted with a purpose which was non-existent, would fall under the ambit of manifest arbitrariness and would therefore be violative of Article 14 of the Constitution – Therefore, this Court is of the considered view that the Impugned Act is also liable to be set aside on the same ground. [Paras 64, 65] Khalsa University (Repeal) Act, 2017 – Khalsa University Act, 2016 – Punjab Private Universities Policy, 2010 – Whether Khalsa University (Repeal) Act, 2017 is unconstitutional: Held: Khalsa University (Repeal) Act, 2017 is struck down as being unconstitutional – The consequent direction is also issued to the effect that the Khalsa University Act, 2016 would be deemed to be in force and status quo as it obtained on 29.05.2017 would stand restored. [Para 66(iii)]

Constitution of India – Art.14 – Differential treatment to a single entity – Charanjit Lal Chowdhury v. Union of India [1950] 1 SCR 869 – discussed. [Paras 26-39]