Regulator Cannot Bar a Second College for the Same Course on a Campus Without a Regulation: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has held that the National Commission for Allied and Healthcare Professions (NCAHP) could not reject a University’s application for a further college on the ground of a restriction that existed only as a proposal and for which there was no statutory prohibition. The Court allowed the petition and set aside the rejection.

Background

• Parul University, a private university under the Gujarat Private Universities Act, 2009, already runs two physiotherapy colleges on its campus.
• On 22.08.2026 it applied for a third college offering a 100 seat Bachelor of Physiotherapy (BPT) programme for the 2026 to 27 academic year, and later submitted an Essentiality Certificate dated 09.09.2026.
• On 15.09.2026 the NCAHP rejected the application, on the ground that more than one college for the same course should not be established on the same campus.
• The NCAHP argued that this was a policy matter within its domain, and that administrative instructions can fill gaps where rules are silent.

What the Court held

• No existing regulation prohibits another college for the same course on the same campus. The NCAHP was only considering such a policy for the future.
• Administrative or executive orders cannot override the institution’s right under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution when no regulation exists.
• Paragraph 4.3 of the NCAHP’s office order of 08.04.2026 allows new courses in existing or new institutions on listed conditions, and the Court noted that the petitioner met them.
• The NCAHP has the power under the National Commission for Allied and Healthcare Professions Act, 2021 to frame policies and standards, but none had been framed. The fear that a future policy might bar two colleges was called speculative and far fetched.

Directions

The rejection communication of NCAHP dated 15.09.2026 was set aside and the respondents were directed to take consequential action within one week, because counselling was ongoing.

What this means for institutions: EduLegaL Note

Institutions expanding their academic offerings should ask the regulator to point to the regulation or statutory provision that supports any restriction. A proposed policy, or an instruction with no regulation behind it, is not a legal bar. This is especially relevant for allied and healthcare education, and for private and multidisciplinary universities.