IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.H.L.DATTU & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH TUESDAY, THE 25TH MARCH 2008 / 5TH CHAITHRA 1930 W.A.No. 685 of 2008 ---------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.9068/2008 DATED 18/03/2008 .................... APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS: ----------------------------------------- 1. MACDEEN DAVID, 2ND YEAR B.SC NURSING STUDENT, CRESCENT COLLEGE OF NURSING, ALATHUR, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 2. DENNY JOSE, 2ND YEAR B.SC NURSING STUDENT, CRESCENT COLLEGE OF NURSING, ALATHUR, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 3. RIYAN MUHIYIDDIN, 2ND YEAR B.SC NURSING STUDENT, CRESCENT COLLEGE OF NURSING, ALATHUR, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 4. DAYOL NARAYANAN, 2ND YEAR B.SC NURSING STUDENT, CRESCENT COLLEGE OF NURSING, ALATHUR, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 5. ARUN SOBE T.N., 2ND YEAR B.SC NURSING STUDENT, CRESCENT COLLEGE OF NURSING, ALATHUR, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 6. LAKSHMI T.C., 2ND YEAR B.SC. NURSING STUDENT, CRESCENT COLLEGE OF NURSING, ALATHUR, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. DR.GEORGE ABRAHAM RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: ----------------------------------------------- 1. UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, CAICUT UNIVERSITY P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. W.A.NO.685 OF 2008 - 2 - 2. THE REGISTRAR, UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT, CALICUT UNIVERSITY P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 3. CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATIONS, UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT, CALICUT UNIVERSITY P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 4. THE PRINCIPAL, CRESCENT COLLEGE OF NURSING, ALATHUR, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. R1 TO R3 BY STANDING COUNSEL MR.P.C.SASIDHARAN THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: H.L.DATTU, C.J. & K.M.JOSEPH, J. ---------------------------------------------------- W.A.No.685 of 2008 --------------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 25th day of March, 2008 JUDGMENT K.M.Joseph, J. Appellants are the writ petitioners. They are students of the B.Sc Nursing Course. They were admitted in the 4th respondent College of Nursing affiliated to the first respondent University in the academic year 2005-06. They have approached this Court seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to permit them to write the 2nd year B.Sc. Nursing Examination scheduled as per Ext.P15 time table and also for a direction to publish the results of the 2nd supplementary examination of the 1st year B.Sc. Nursing Course before the commencement of the 2nd year examination as per Ext.P15 time table. They have also sought a writ of mandamus for publication of the results of revaluation of their answer sheets as per Exts.P1 to P6. 2. The appellants though attended the 1st year examination did not succeed in passing all the papers. In the supplementary examination held in September, 2007 also they could not pass all the papers. The result was, in the teeth of clause 8 of the Regulation of the B.Sc. Nursing Degree Course, they were not entitled to sit for the 2nd year examination. However, they drew support from Exts.P13 and P14 and sought a mandamus to the University to permit them to sit for the 2nd year examination. The said arguments did not find favour with the learned Single Judge and he followed his own decision in an earlier writ petition and dismissed the writ petition. It is accordingly that this writ appeal has been preferred. 3. We heard Dr.George Abraham, learned counsel appearing for the appellants and Mr.P.C.Sasidharan, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the University. W.A.No.685 of 2008 2 4. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants would submit that the appellants were students who were admitted to the 2005-06 batch of Nursing Course. By Ext.P13, it is pointed out, that the Vice Chancellor in exercise of his powers under Section 10 of the Calicut University Act, 1975 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') has proceeded to exempt students belonging to four batches (2002-06 admissions) from the purview of clause 8 of the Regulation of the B.Sc. Nursing Degree Course. Students belonging to those batches are entitled to sit for the examination even though they have not passed the previous examination. He would further point out that Ext.P14 dated 23.7.2007 would only show that sanction was given to implement the recommendations of the Board of Studies in Nursing (UG) held on 14.6.2007 effecting the modification mentioned therein in relation to the provision for 'year out' for B.Sc. Nursing Course from 2007-08 academic year onwards. Ext.P13 came to be cancelled by Ext.P14 order dated 23.7.2007. He would contend that persons like the appellants who belonged to 2005-06 batch were covered by Ext.P13 are entitled to the benefit of exemption from clause 8 of the Regulations. This is for the reason, he would contend, that Ext.P14 would show that the decision to modify the provision for 'year out' can enure to the batch from the academic year 2007-08 onwards only. Therefore, he would contend that Ext.P13 continues to bind the University in so far as the students like the appellants are concerned as they belonged to the 2005-06 batch covered by the admissions mentioned in Ext.P13. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the University, on the other hand, would contend that though the Vice Chancellor has endowed with emergency powers in extra ordinary circumstances, that would not empower the Vice Chancellor who is an officer of the University to exercise a power which is not W.A.No.685 of 2008 3 vested with the Academic Council which is a body under the University. He took us to Section 25 of the Act which enumerates the powers available to the Academic Council. He pointed out that while the Act empowers the Academic Council to modify or amend the Regulations, so long as the statutory body under the Act are bound in terms of the statutory regulations, it is not open even to the Vice Chancellor to exercise his powers under Section 10(12) to do something which is not permitted under the Act. He also refers to Section 10 (11) in support of his contention that it is the duty of the Vice Chancellor to act in compliance with the Act, Statutes, etc. made thereunder. It is not open to any Vice Chancellor to act against any provisions of the Act or Statute. Section 25 of the Act reads as follows: “25. Powers and duties of Academic Council.- Subject to the provisions of this Act and the Statutes, the Academic Council shall have the following powers, duties and functions, namely:- (i) to advise the Senate and the Syndicate on all academic matters; (ii) to make Regulations and to amend or repeal the same; (iii) to prescribe the courses of studies in the institutions maintained by, or affiliated to, the University; (iv) to prescribe the qualifications of teachers- (a)in colleges; and (b) in the institutions maintained by the University; (v) to prescribe the qualifications for admission of students to the various courses of studies and to the examinations and the conditions under which exemptions may be granted; (vi) to make provision for the admission of students to the various courses of studies on the basis of merit, in order to maintain standards of education; (vii) to make proposals for the instruction and training in such branches of learning as it may think fit. W.A.No.685 of 2008 4 (viii) to make proposals for research and advancement and dissemination of knowledge; (ix) to make proposals for the institution of professorships, readerships, lectureships and other teaching and research posts required by the University; (x) to make proposals for the institution of fellowships, travelling fellowships, scholarships, studentships, medals and prizes; (xi) to make proposals for determining what degrees, diplomas and other academic distinctions shall be granted by the University; (xii) to decide what examinations of other Universities may be accepted as equivalent to those of the University and to negotiate with other Universities for the recognition of the examinations of the University; (xiii) to arrange for the co-ordination of studies and teaching in affiliated colleges and recognised institutions; (xiv) to exercise such other powers and perform such other duties as may be conferred or imposed on it by this Act or the Statutes, Ordinances, Regulations, rules or bye-laws.” 6. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants is unable to point out any provision in the Act or the Statute which enables the Vice Chancellor to relax the rigour of a statutory regulation apart from Section 25 of the Act which we have already referred to above. Therefore, we are unable to agree with the contention of the learned counsel for the appellants. It is trite law that a statutory authority, particularly in the light of Section 10(11) of the Act which mandates that the Vice Chancellor is bound to implement the Act and the Statute is no doubt endowed with powers to relax the rigour of a regulation. It may be true as submitted by the learned counsel for the appellants, that the benefit of Ext.P13 was available to the students of the earlier batches, but what the appellants seek is invocation of the authority under Article 226 of the W.A.No.685 of 2008 5 Constitution. In other words, he seeks the help of this Court. It is well settled that the jurisdiction of this Court is to keep the authorities within the bounds of law. What the appellants seek of us is to direct the authority to act contrary to the mandate of the law. This request is prohibited by the catena of decisions of the apex Court. This is apart from the fact that a perusal of Ext.P14 would show that the Vice Chancellor has approved the decision of the Board of Studies to retain clause 8 of the regulations. Even proceeding to accept the case of the appellants that the appellants fall within the batches mentioned in Ext.P13 and Ext.P13 would come to the rescue of the appellants, we are of the view that what the appellants seek from us is a writ of mandamus which itself must be based on the existence of a legal right with the applicant and a legal duty on the part of the respondents to give a direction contrary to the explicit terms of regulation 8. We would therefore agree with the reasoning of the learned Single Judge. The writ appeal is dismissed. (H.L.DATTU) CHIEF JUSTICE (K.M.JOSEPH) JUDGE vns