Al-Falah University Challenges Haryana's Takeover in High Court, Calls It Arbitrary

Al-Falah University Challenges Haryana's Takeover in High Court, Calls It Arbitrary

Al-Falah University and the Al-Falah Charitable Trust have initiated legal action in the Punjab and Haryana High Court, contesting the Haryana government's decision to place the private minority-run institution under a state-appointed administrator. The petition vehemently describes this move as an "unbridled and arbitrary" takeover that fundamentally strips the university of its autonomy and self-governance rights.

Legal Challenge Against Government Orders and Amended Act

In their comprehensive petition, the university has challenged two specific government actions:

• The March 18 order appointing IAS officer Amit Aggarwal as the university's administrator.
• The legal provisions introduced through the Haryana Private Universities (Amendment) Act, which was officially notified on January 6, 2025.

The petition argues that the amended legislation provides the government with sweeping authority to assume complete control of a private university under the broad pretext of addressing "grave lapses" concerning national security, public security, or law and order. Specifically, the powers granted under Sections 44B and 46 of the new act effectively transfer management, financial oversight, and property control to external entities, with no defined temporal limit on this control.

—

Constitutional Violations and Minority Rights

Labeling these provisions as unconstitutional, the petition invokes Articles 14 and 30 of the Indian Constitution. It alleges that the amendment is "manifestly arbitrary", fails to meet the standard of reasonableness, and directly violates the rights of a minority institution to administer its own affairs. The document further contends that, when interpreted alongside other sub-sections, the law permits the state to maintain control even after normalcy is restored, effectively leading to the dissolution or conversion of the private minority institution.

Additionally, the trust has challenged two government communications dated January 14, accusing them of being issued with "malicious intent" and demonstrating "complete non-application of mind." The primary relief sought is the quashing of both the amended provisions and the related notices.

University's Response to Security Allegations

The university has asserted to the court that the state's intervention was unjustified, as it had already taken decisive action against individuals allegedly involved in the incident that prompted the government crackdown. According to the petition, four faculty members linked to the November 10 blast near the Red Fort in Delhi—which resulted in 15 fatalities—were terminated immediately after their alleged involvement came to light.

The terminated individuals are named as Nisarul Hassan, Umar-un-Nabi, Shaheen Saeed, and Muzammil Shakeel. Umar-un-Nabi, an assistant professor, was alleged to have driven the explosives-laden vehicle, while two other faculty members were arrested for storing substantial quantities of ammonium nitrate. The university described this episode as a "completely unforeseeable" turn of events and emphasized that it acted promptly, responsibly, and with transparency.

Court Proceedings and Government Inquiry

The case was initially filed in February. During its first hearing, the high court noted that the state had already entered an appearance on advance notice and directed it to submit a detailed reply within six weeks. The bench also permitted the petitioners to implead the Union Home Ministry as a respondent. On the critical question of vires (constitutional validity), the court issued a notice, indicating its intent to examine the legitimacy of the 2025 amendment. For the interim, the court allowed the petitioners to respond to any show-cause notices, while authorities could proceed with legal actions in accordance with the law.

At the most recent hearing on April 6, the court granted additional time to both the Central government and the Haryana state government to file their replies. The matter is now scheduled for further hearing on May 5.

Background and Government Justification

The state's intervention followed an inquiry conducted by IAS officer Shyamal Misra, which uncovered statutory violations and irregularities in the university's operations. After assuming control, the government assured that academic activities would continue uninterrupted for approximately 1,700 students, with administrative and financial affairs being managed by the appointed administrator and a team drawn from JC Bose University.

This legal battle highlights significant tensions between state authority and institutional autonomy, particularly concerning minority educational institutions. The outcome of this case could set a precedent for how private universities are regulated and the extent of government intervention permissible under Indian law.