'Absolute Abuse of Court Process’: Meghalaya HC Slams Frivolous Plea, Upholds Repeal of Rajitlal University Act After ‘Three Years of Inaction
Sanchayita Lahkar
The High Court of Meghalaya Division Bench of Chief Justice I.P. Mukerji and Justice W. Diengdoh held that the power to enact or repeal legislation lies solely with the legislature, and no court can direct it otherwise unless the statute is shown to be unconstitutional or a fraud on legislative power. The Court dismissed the writ petition challenging the Rajitlal University (Repealing) Act, 2023, terming it an abuse of the process of law. No relief was granted, and the writ was dismissed without costs.
The petitioners, including RITHS Trust, its Chairman Dr. P.L. Rajitlal, and the Rajitlal University (represented through the sponsor Trust), filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking to quash the Rajitlal University (Repealing) Act, 2023. The said Act had repealed the earlier Rajitlal University Act, 2011 (published in the Gazette of Meghalaya as Act No. 1 of 2020). The petitioners also sought interim relief to stay the operation of the repealing legislation, which the Court declined to grant.
The Rajitlal University Act, 2011 had empowered RITHS Trust, as the sponsor, to establish a private university in the State of Meghalaya, subject to compliance with several preconditions. Under Section 3(2) of the Act, the sponsor was required to submit a detailed proposal to the State Government. Upon satisfaction of the eligibility requirements, including the creation of an endowment fund under UGC guidelines, the State Government was expected to formally establish the University by way of notification.
Section 5 of the 2011 Act designated the proposed university as a self-financing institution. However, the petitioners did not initiate the application process or establish the mandatory endowment fund during the three years following the Act’s publication in the Official Gazette. In this backdrop, the Meghalaya Legislative Assembly passed the Rajitlal University (Repealing) Ordinance, 2023, later regularised by the Rajitlal University (Repealing) Act, 2023.
The repealing statute’s Statement of Objects and Reasons, as submitted before the Assembly, cited the inaction of the sponsor Trust as a key rationale. The legislature stated that the continued existence of the enabling Act without any actual effort to establish the university might allow for misuse by fraudulent entities, thereby compromising the reputation of the State and misguiding students.
The petitioners contended that the repealing Act was unconstitutional and amounted to an arbitrary exercise of power. They asserted a vested right to establish the university and claimed that their lack of action within the prescribed timeframe did not justify legislative repeal. No contractual agreement, however, was shown to exist between the petitioners and the State.
The State and legislative respondents opposed the petition, arguing that no cause of action had arisen for judicial interference and that the legislative repeal was a valid exercise of power under Entry 25 of List III (Concurrent List) of the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution, which includes universities and technical education.
The Bench recorded: “The most extraordinary and ingenious feature of this transaction between the petitioners and the government was that the latter did not enter into any contract with the petitioners for founding a University.”
It further stated: “The University was sought to be set up through legislation. The said Act did not set it up. There was a machinery provided in the Act itself for setting it up in future. As the provisions of the Act suggest, it was not born out of the said Act but would be born on fulfilment of the conditions of the Act by the writ petitioners.”
Addressing the legislative power, the Court noted: “Under Article 246 of the Constitution of India, the state legislature has the power to legislate in respect of Entry 25 of List III… In exercise of such power, the said Act was enacted and also thereafter repealed. The power to enact and to repeal is the sole prerogative of the legislature.”
On the petitioners’ prayer to quash the repealing Act, the Court stated: “We are not aware of any power residing in the Court to compel the legislature to enact a law or to stay or set aside the repeal thereof.”
It clarified: “The only power that the Court has is to determine whether the enactment is a fraud on the Constitution or legislative power or ultra vires the Constitution or violative of any provision thereof.”
The Court remarked on the factual background: “Three years have elapsed since the Act was enacted. The petitioners have not provided any fund in terms of the endowment fund as contemplated under the Act.”
Rejecting the plea for judicial review, the Court stated: “We cannot rule that the repealing Act is a fraud on the legislative power of the Meghalaya Assembly.”
Summing up, the Division Bench recorded: “The petitioners have no right to question the legislature on what legislation it shall enact or shall not make or whether it would repeal a particular Act. Under the doctrine of separation of powers… Parliament and State Legislatures are the sole judge of what law they are to make.”
The Court issued the following final directive: “For the above reasons, we find this writ to be an absolute abuse of the process of Court. It is hereby dismissed as frivolous.”
The Division Bench did not find any grounds for granting interim or final relief. It directed that the writ petition be dismissed in full and made no order as to costs, citing the facts and circumstances of the case.
Advocates Representing the Parties
For the Petitioners: Mr. S.V. Ranjan, Advocate; Ms. D.F. Mawrie, Advocate
For the Respondents: Mr. N.D. Chullai, Additional Advocate General with Ms. Z.E. Nongkynrih, Government Advocate, Mr. B. Deb, Advocate
Case Title : RITHS Trust & Ors. v. State of Meghalaya & Ors.
Neutral Citation: 2025:MLHC:274-DB
Case Number: WP(C) No. 364 of 2023
Bench: Justice I.P. Mukerji (Chief Justice), Justice W. Diengdoh
[Read/Download order]
