139

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
I.A.

OF 2004
IN

WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.

OF 2004.

IN THE MATTER OF:

Sandeep Parekh and ors.

Petitioners
VERSUS

Union of India and ors.

Respondents

APPLICATION FOR INTERIM RELIEFS

TO
HONBLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE AND HIS
HONBLE COMPANION JUSTICES OF THE
HONBLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
THE HUMBLE PETITION OF THE
PETITIONERS ABOVENAMED

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHEWETH:

1.

The Petitioners have filed the above writ petition in public

interest.

2.

The Petitioners have stated the relevant facts elaborately in

the Writ Petition. For the sake of brevity, the same are not
repeated in the present application. The Petitioners however
crave leave to refer to and rely on the same at the time of the
hearing of the present application as if the same formed part
of the present application.

3.

The Respondents by the impuged order has sought to reduce

drastically the fees charged in the Indian Institutes of
Management (IIMs) which, if implemented would not only

140
affect the autonomy and the independence of the IIMs, but
would ultimately affect the excellence achieved by them over
the last four decades. The impugned order is vitiated in that
the Respondents failed to take into account relevant facts
but took into account irrelevant considerations (set out
elaborately in the Writ Petition) in issuing the impugned
order. The 2nd Respondent has admittedly issued the order
with an eye on the vote bank. The 2nd Respondent in issuing
the impugned order acted mala fide in that he wants to gain
control over these world class institutions by destroying their
autonomy and by making them financially dependant on the
government.
4.

The IIMs are facing a shortage of qualified faculty. Therefore

in the event of any unilateral diktats of the Respondents to
the IIMs there is a high possibility that a part of the existing
faculty would leave either for private institutions or to foreign
universities for teaching. In such an event the institutions
which are composed largely of outstanding students and
faculty would be damaged beyond repair.

5.

But for the intervention of this Honble Court there is a

serious possibility that the educational institutions of higher
learning and with it the future of the country could be
irreversibly harmed for the personal benefit of the votebank
of specific persons. Such mala fide action should not be
allowed for even a short period of time as it will result in
grave injury to a vast number of persons and institutions. No
injury will be caused to the Respondents if the stay on the
impugned order is allowed. The balance of convenience is
entirely in favour of the Petitioners.

6.

The Petitioners have a prima facie case and the purpose of

filing the present petition will be frustrated if the order dated
5.2.04 is not stayed during the pendency of the present case;

141
PRAYER
It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that pending final orders
this Honble Court may graciously be pleased to:
(i)

Stay the impugned order dated 5.2.2004.

(ii)

Pass an order restraining the Respondents from enforcing

any other major decision which is likely to adversely
impact the IIMs and its students pending the final
hearing in this Petition.

(iii)

Directing the Respondents to disclose the contents of the

UR Rao Committee report.

(iv)

Directing

the

Respondents

to

disclose

all

relevant

information which the Ministry proposes to take, so that

the public and the IIMs are allowed to take part in the
consultative

process

for

any

improvements

in

management education.
(v)

appoint independent bodies/agencies, if

necessary, to

supervise and to report to this Honble Court on the

action taken by the Respondents in this connection; and
(vi)

Pass any other or further orders, as this Honble Court

may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

DRAWN & FILED BY

(P.H. PAREKH & CO.)

Place: New Delhi
Dated: 9.2.2004