IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 17.2.2010 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.JYOTHIMANI W.P.Nos.14813 of 2008, 10819, 10923, 11140, 11698 and 11699 of 2009 W.P.No.14813 of 2008: Venkateswara Teacher Training Institute run by Venkateswara Training Insitute of Vetri Coaching Centre, [reg. As society vide No.239/2001] No.108A. Maraimalai Adigal Salai Puducherry  605 001 rep. by its President .. Petitioner Vs. 1. Union Territory of Pondicherry rep. by Secretary to Government Education Department, Chief Secretariat Puducherry. 2. The Directorate of School Education Government of Pondicherry Puducherry. 3. The Director Directorate of Government Examinations DPI Complex, College Road Chennai  600 006. 4. The Director Directorate of Teacher Education Research and Training (DTERT) DPI Complex, College Road Chennai  600 006. .. Respondents and batch cases. For Petitioners : Mr.P.V.S.Giridhar in all WPs. For Respondents : Mr.T.Murugesan, Government Pleader (Puducherry) assisted by Ms.N.Mala, Govt. Adv. for 1st respondent in WPs.11698 and 11699 of 2009, for respondents 1 and 2 in WP.14813 of 2008 and 11140 of 2009, for respondents 1 to 3 in WPs.10923 and 10819 of 2009 Ms.Dhakshayani Reddy, Govt. Adv. For 2nd respondent in WPs.11698 and 11699 of 2009, for respondents 3 and 4 in WP.14813 of 2008 and 11140 of 2009, for 4th respondent in WPs.10923 and 10819 of 2009 ORDER In all these writ petitions, the issue involved relate to the admission and the consequential permission to be given to the students of the petitioners/institutions to complete their D.T.Ed. course by directing the Director of School Education, Puducherry to approve the admission of various students. 2.1. While W.P.No.14813 of 2008 has been filed by the petitioner/ institution, namely Venkateswara Teacher Training Institute, Puducherry challenging the government order in G.O.Ms.No.64, Chief Secretariat (Education-I), dated 25.5.2006 which stipulates the domicile requirement in admission of students in respect of the professional educational institutions by way of a regulation called the Pondicherry Private Professional Educational Institutions (Domicile Requirement in Admission of Students) Regulation, 2006, the said institution has filed W.P.No.11698 of 2009 seeking for a direction against the Directorate of School Education, Puducherry to permit the students of the said petitioner/institution to complete their D.T.Ed. course and to get their Diploma certificates. 2.2. It is stated that the said Venkateswara Teacher Training Institute, Puducherry has commenced D.T.Ed. course from the academic year 2004-2005 on the basis of a No Objection Certificate issued by the Government of Puducherry in the order dated 30.1.2004 for an intake of 100 seats as per the norms of the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE). It is stated that the NCTE has also granted recognition on 28.10.2004 for an intake of 100 students. The petitioner/institution is unaided self-financing institution and even though it is entitled to fill up all the 100 seats by itself, it has originally surrendered 20% of the seats to Government of Puducherry and thereafter offered 50% of the seats for students sponsored by the Government of Puducherry in the year 2006 to be filled up through CENTAC. As per G.O.Ms.No.64, Chief Secretariat (Education-I), dated 25.5.2006 in respect of 50% of the seats to be filled up through CENTAC, the same has been directed to be filled from the candidates domiciled in the Union Territory of Puducherry. 2.3. It is stated that in the year 2006 many of such seats to be filled up from CENTAC were unfilled for want of candidates domiciled in Puducherry. It is stated that the Directorate of School Education, Puducherry in the order dated 29.1.2007 has permitted the private managements of unaided Teacher Training Institutes to fill up the above said lapsed seats as per the domicile rule prescribed in G.O.Ms.No.64, Chief Secretariat (Education-I), dated 25.5.2006. It is stated that since students domiciled in Puducherry were not available, the petitioner/ institution and others to avoid the seats to go waste, were forced to admit students from outside Puducherry and it is the case of the petitioner that the said admissions were subsequently approved by the Directorate of School Education, Puducherry. 2.4. Even in the year 2007 when the Directorate of School Education, Puducherry has called for applications for admission to D.T.Ed. course in respect of the 50 seats, there was no adequate response and in that year the Directorate of School Education, Puducherry has sponsored only 36 students for admission. Since 14 seats to be filled through CENTAC remained unfilled, the petitioner sought permission by representations dated 10.9.2007 and 12.10.2007 to fill up the lapsed seats. The Government has issued a further notification for admission in respect of seats to be filled through CENTAC category and there was no response. 2.5. It was in those circumstances the petitioner/institution has advertised in the leading newspapers for admission in respect of the said lapsed seats. Since no candidate domiciled in Puducherry has come forward, the petitioner/institution has admitted 14 students from Tamil Nadu and thereafter forwarded the list of students admitted in the lapsed category on 28.11.2007, 29.11.2007, 11.12.2007 and 20.12.2007 for approval. It is stated that the students admitted under CENTAC quota and management quota were approved by the Directorate of School Education, Puducherry, except in respect of one student, G.Elayakanni by way of endorsement dated 20.12.2007 on the ground of "belated admission" and she has also discontinued. However, the Directorate of School Education, Puducherry has not passed any orders in respect of approval of admission of 14 students in the lapsed category under CENTAC who are stated to belong to OBC, MBC and SC category. In the meantime, the students admitted in the year 2007 have completed minimum required 220 working days along with the mandatory 40 days teaching practice. 2.6. The Directorate of School Education, Puducherry has issued hall tickets on 14.6.2008 for first year examination scheduled from 26.6.2008. Since the hall tickets for 14 students admitted in the lapsed category were not issued, the petitioner/institution made a representation. However, the Directorate of School Education, Puducherry has orally informed that the 14 students admitted in the lapsed category cannot take their first year examination since their admission is not as per the domicile rule in G.O.Ms.No.64, Chief Secretariat (Education-I) , dated 25.5.2006. 2.7. The writ petitioner challenges the validity of the said G.O.Ms.No.64, Chief Secretariat (Education-I), dated 25.5.2006 as without jurisdiction; that the government order is not even followed in the Union Territory of Puducherry in respect of other institutions, especially relating to medical colleges; and that it was not the wilful conduct of the petitioner in admitting those students and the admission was due to the reason that in spite of the efforts taken by the Government of Puducherry also to find out the students of domicile character as per the G.O.Ms.No.64, Chief Secretariat (Education-I), dated 25.5.2006 there were no students available and therefore their admission was made as a matter of necessity, and seeks for a direction against the Directorate of School Education, Puducherry to permit the students of the petitioner/institution to complete their D.T.Ed. course. The list of such students whose results are sought to be declared, as given in the type set of papers, are: Sl.No. Name of the candidate Date of Joining 1 Annapackia Pushpa.A. 24.10.2007 2 Cilintha Julie Thaddeus.K 31.10.2007 3 Kalaimathi.S 26.10.2007 4 Karunakaran.R 12.11.2007 5 Mallika.G 02.11.2007 6 Manimegalai.M 15.11.2007 7 Manjula.M 30.10.2007 8 Neela.S 30.10.2007 9 Saritha.A 11.12.2007 10 Sathya.C 14.11.2007 11 Soruba Rani Sumathi.G 19.11.2007 12 Sumithra.P 14.11.2007 13 Tamilselvi.M 26.11.2007 14 Vijaya.V 26.11.2007 2.8. In the earlier writ petition in W.P.No.14813 of 2008 referred to above, the writ petitioner/institution has challenged the said G.O.Ms.No.64, Chief Secretariat (Education-I), dated 25.5.2006 and also sought for a direction to approve the admission of the said 14 students admitted under the lapsed category of CENTAC for D.T.Ed. course in 2007-2008, which is for the same relief. 3.1. W.P.No.11699 of 2009 is filed by St.Joseph Teacher Training Institute, Karaikal for a direction against the Directorate of School Education, Puducherry to permit the students admitted in the year 2007-2008 numbering 27, which is as follows as per the type set of papers, stated to have been admitted in the said year under CENTAC category in the lapsed seats: Sl.No. Name of the candidate 1 Arun Arockia Dass 2 Jayaraj 3 Kaliyamurthy 4 Alphonse 5 Karunakaran 6 Muthamiselvan 7 Parameswaran 8 Reagon Socreties 9 Saminathan 10 Sivasakthivel 11 Benitha 12 Ezhilarasi 13 Kalaiselvi 14 Kanimozhi 15 Krishnaveni 16 Kulandai Leema Ross 17 Mariyanesam 18 Maria Sagaya Rocelin 19 Manimegalai 20 Pavaimalar 21 Pourselvi 22 Rajeswari 23 Rubia 24 Sheela 25 Sivasangri 26 Usharani 27 Vinayagam 3.2. In this case also, the institution has commenced in the year 2004-2005. No Objection Certificate was issued by the Directorate of School Education, Puducherry for an intake of 100 students. NCTE has granted recognition on 23.11.2004 for an intake of 100 students. It is stated that for the academic year 2006-2007 even though the petitioner/ institution being self-financing unaided minority institution is entitled to fill up all the 100 seats, it has surrendered 50% of the seats to be sponsored by the Government of Puducherry through CENTAC. Again as per G.O.Ms.No.64, Chief Secretariat (Education-I), dated 25.5.2006, the said 50% of the seats surrendered to CENTAC were directed to be filled up through the candidates domiciled in the Union Territory of Puducherry. 3.3. In the year 2006, there were no students available to be sponsored through CENTAC in the said 50% of seats and as a last chance, to avoid wastage of seats, students were admitted from other States and that was approved by the Directorate of School Education, Puducherry. Again in the year 2007-2008, for the 50 CENTAC seats advertisement was made and there was no sufficient response from the persons domiciled in Puducherry and the representations were made seeking permission to admit students of the petitioner's choice. Thereafter, the petitioner/ institution has advertised about the vacancies in the newspapers for admitting students domiciled in Puducherry and there was no response and therefore, the petitioner/institution was constrained to admit 48 students from Tamil Nadu who applied for admission. The list of 100 candidates admitted through CENTAC and management quota was forwarded for approval. It is stated that number of these students belong to OBC, MBC and SC category and are eligible for relaxation and that the students have completed the minimum 220 working days required for completing the first year course and also underwent the mandatory 40 days teaching practice successfully in different recognized schools. 3.4. It is stated that when the time table was released by the Directorate of School Education, Puducherry for the first year examinations scheduled from 26.6.2008, the Directorate of School Education, Puducherry has refused permission to the 48 students admitted by the petitioner/institution under CENTAC quota on the basis that their admission is against G.O.Ms.No.64, Chief Secretariat (Education-I), dated 25.5.2006. In this case also G.O.Ms.No.64, Chief Secretariat (Education-I), dated 25.5.2006 is challenged and the writ petition is filed a direction as stated above. 4.1. The said institution, namely St.Joseph Teacher Training Institute, Karaikal has also filed W.P.No.10923 of 2009 challenging the order of the Directorate of School Education, Puducherry dated 4.6.2008 directing that the admission of students in respect of the professional educational institutions should be by way of the regulation called the Puducherry Professional Educational Institutions (Provision of Reservation, Admission of Students and Fixation of fees) Regulations, 2008, which was passed on the basis of G.O.Ms.No.64, Chief Secretariat (Education-I), dated 25.5.2006 issued by the Government of Puducherry and for a consequential direction against the Directorate of School Education, Puducherry to approve the admission of 100 students made for the year 2008-2009. 4.2. It is the case of the said petitioner/institution that the norms and standards for D.T.Ed. course have been fixed by the NCTE, wherein the minimum qualifications were prescribed. It is stated that the appropriate governments have also been empowered to prescribe the standard and accordingly, the fourth respondent in this writ petition, viz., the Director, Directorate of Teacher Education, Research and Training, Chennai has fixed qualifying marks for the students for admission as follows: "a) A candidate should have passed the Higher Secondary Examination or its equivalent with 45% of marks in aggregate (not below 540 out of 1200) b) The 45% of marks in the Higher Secondary examination will be inclusive of First Improvement only c) For Schedule Caste and Scheduled Tribe applicants, a mere pass in the Higher Secondary examination is enough" 4.3. It is stated that out of 100 students to be admitted per year, the management can fill up 50% of seats while the remaining 50% are to be filled through CENTAC and the Government of Puducherry has not sponsored the required number of students for many years resulting in lapsed category in which the private institutions after following the procedure have admitted students. It is stated that the Government of Puducherry could not fill up the CENTAC quota seats for the academic year 2008-2009, the CENTAC system discontinued and the petitioner and other institutions were permitted to fill up all seats and therefore, the petitioner has admitted students for D.T.Ed. course for the academic year 2008-2009. Since there were no sufficient takers of seven seats, students belonging to SC and ST community, who scored marks above 40% and below 45% in the qualifying examination were admitted based on the direction of the fourth respondent in this writ petition, namely the Director, Directorate of Teacher Education, Research and Training, Chennai relating to admission in the State of Tamil Nadu. 4.4. It is stated that the petitioner/institution has forwarded the list of 50 students on 26.8.2008, another list of 35 students on 29.9.2008 and a further list of 15 students on 30.9.2008 for approval of the Directorate of School Education, Puducherry. It is stated that when one student, Ms.Victoria discontinued, another student was admitted in her place and her name was sent on 30.9.2008. It is stated that the last list of students dated 30.9.2008, numbering 15, was returned for want of particulars like sex, age, community, date of birth, etc. and after complying the same, the list was once again sent on 25.10.2008 and 29.10.2008 and the Directorate of School Education, Puducherry has not passed any orders in spite of the reminders. It is stated that the Directorate of School Education, Puducherry has granted approval of admission in respect of other institutions like Loyola Institute of Teacher Training, etc. 4.5. It is further stated that when the Principal, District Institute of Education and Training (DIET), Puducherry has directed the petitioner to forward the list once again, the particulars were furnished again and in spite of it no orders were passed by the Government. It is stated that the petitioner/institution falls under the control of the Director, Directorate of Teacher Education, Research and Training, Chennai and that the said authority has published the time table scheduling the first year D.T.Ed. examination to commence from 22.6.2009. The petitioner/ institution has sought for approval of admission of the said students from respondents 2 and 3 in the said writ petition, however the third respondent has approved admission of candidates in S.Nos.1 to 85, while rejecting admission of candidates at S.Nos.50 to 53 in the Science stream and S.Nos.27 to 29 in Arts stream, stating that the said 7 candidates are ineligible for admission since they have secured less than 45% of marks in the Higher Secondary examination, however it is stated that no order has been passed in that regard. 4.6. It is stated that for disapproval of the said seven candidates, the second respondent has relied on the earlier guidelines issued dated 4.6.2008 which is impugned in this writ petition, wherein it is stipulated that for admission to D.T.Ed. course the required educational qualification is a pass in Higher Secondary examination or equivalent course with 60% of marks, with relaxation of 5% of marks in favour of SC/ST and OBC candidates. The said guidelines issued by the Directorate of School Education, Puducherry dated 4.6.2008 is assailed on the grounds that it is arbitrary and illegal, that no written order has been passed, and that when the CENTAC system of admission has been given up, the qualifications prescribed by the fourth respondent being the examining body for the D.T.Ed., namely a pass for SC/ST candidates should alone be taken into consideration and not the impugned norms of the Government of Puducherry. 5.1. Likewise, the petitioner/institution in W.P.No.10819 of 2009, viz., Senthil Teacher Training Institute, Puducherry has also challenged the said guidelines of the Directorate of School Education, Puducherry dated 4.6.2008 seeking for approval of admission of 15 students listed at S.Nos.86 to 100 in the petitioner's representation dated 30.9.2008 which has been listed in the annexure to the type set as follows: Sl.No. Name of the candidate 1 S.Govindaraj 2 A.Arulmozhi 3 S.Soniya Gandhi 4 D.Dhanavel 5 K.Vijayakarpagam 6 S.Uma 7 N.Jothimeena 8 A.Jayapratha 9 S.Arun 10 K.Jawahar Prabhu 11 M.Mani 12 P.Bamasantha Regini 13 P.Somasundaram 14 E.Pragash 15 K.Suresh 5.2. In this case also like that of the petitioner in W.P.No.10923 of 2009, the petitioner being an institution whose students are to write examination conducted by the Director, Directorate of Teacher Education, Research and Training, Chennai scheduled to commence on 22.6.2009, and the Government of Tamil Nadu having prescribed a mere pass for admission of candidates belonging to SC/ST community, it is contended that respondents 2 and 3 cannot claim under the guidelines that the minimum qualification should be 60% of marks for admission with 5% relaxation for SC/ST candidates. In this case, all the 15 students who were rejected belong to SC/ST community and they secured above 40% and below 45% of marks in the qualification examination and the challenge to the guidelines is also similar as that of W.P.No.10923 of 2009. 6.1. Similar is the case in respect of the petitioner/institution in W.P.No.11140 of 2009, viz., Paaventhar Teacher Training Institute. This petitioner/institution also challenges the guidelines dated 4.6.2008 issued by the Directorate of School Education, Puducherry and seeks approval of admission of 10 candidates listed in S.Nos.1 to 10 of the petitioner's letter dated 20.8.2008, which is as follows, along with another list of 27 candidates as per the list dated 31.7.2008. Sl.No. Name of the candidate 1 Tamizharasi.N 2 Sudha.B 3 Rajasekaran.P 4 Sobinichandra.M 5 Thirumalai.M 6 Sudha.N 7 Logapriya.S 8 Parimala.G 9 Manimekalai.G 10 Vithiya.G 6.2. In this writ petition also the petitioner/institution has based its claim on the point that when the examining body, viz., the Director, Directorate of Teacher Education, Research and Training, Chennai and the Government of Tamil Nadu have fixed mere pass in Higher Secondary Examination for admission to D.T.Ed. course, the Government of Puducherry has fixed minimum mark of 60%, with 5% relaxation for SC/ST candidates for the year 2008-2009 and therefore, the same is arbitrary and unreasonable. It is also stated that the above said candidates also belong to SC/ST community. 7. Therefore, on a broad perusal of the entire records it is evident that W.P.Nos.10819, 10923 and 11140 of 2009 filed by Senthil Teacher Training Institute, Puducherry, St.Joseph Teacher Training Institute, Karaikal and Paaventhar Teacher Training Institute, Puducherry respectively are relating to admissions in the year 2008-2009 during which time the admissions by CENTAC is stated to have been given up and in these three cases the petitioners have challenged the impugned guidelines of the Directorate of School Education, Puducherry dated 4.6.2008, by which the Directorate of School Education, Puducherry has prescribed the minimum educational qualification for admission to D.T.Ed. course as a pass in Higher Secondary Examination or equivalent with at least 60% of marks, however with a relaxation of 5% of marks in case of SC/ST and OBC candidates, thereby stipulating that in respect of the said candidates if they get 55% marks alone they will be eligible for admission and as stated above, in the said writ petitions various students belong to SC and ST community were admitted who secured 40% to 45% marks in the qualifying examination and therefore, they are not eligible by the impugned guidelines issued by the Government of Puducherry and that is challenged on the ground that inasmuch as the examining body is the fourth respondent, namely the Director, Directorate of Teacher Education, Research and Training, Chennai and in the State of Tamil Nadu the admitted qualification for SC/ST candidates is a minimum pass in Higher Secondary examination, the stipulation by the Government of Puducherry of more marks is illegal. 8. On the other hand, in W.P.Nos.14813 of 2008 and 11698 of 2009 filed by the same institute, viz., Venkateswara Teacher Training Institute, Puducherry relate to admission of 14 students in the said institute in the year 2007-2008 under CENTAC category, whose names were not approved as they are not domiciled in Puducherry and for a consequential direction to approve the admission of the said candidates and to permit them to complete the course. 9. Likewise, in W.P.No.11699 of 2009, which relates to St.Joseph Teacher Training Institute, Karaikal, G.O.Ms.No.64, Chief Secretariat (Education-I), dated 25.5.2006 is assailed for the reasons stated in the said writ petition, but without challenging the Government order, the writ petition is filed for a direction to approve the admission of 27 candidates admitted in the year 2007-2008 under the CENTAC category, who are not domiciled in Puducherry. 10.1. At this point of time it is relevant to point out that in respect of the students admitted in Venkateswara Teacher Training Institute, Puducherry for the year 2007-2008, this Court has passed an order on 25.6.2008 in M.P.No.2 of 2008 in W.P.No.14813 of 2008 directing the respondents to permit the students of the petitioner/institution to write their first year examinations, with a further direction not to release the results until further orders stating that it is subject to the result of the writ petition without conferring any right either on the students or on the institution. 10.2. Thereafter, in the order dated 26.6.2009 passed in M.P.No.1 of 2009 in W.P.No.11698 of 2009 relating to the same institution, a direction was issued in respect of the said 14 students to write their second year examination to commence from 30.6.2009, directing that the results shall not be published until further orders and that the same is subject to the result of the writ petition without conferring any right on the students or the institution and it is not in dispute that based on the said two interim orders, the said 14 students have taken up their first and second year examinations of the two years D.T.Ed. course. 10.3. It is also seen that in respect of the students of St.Joseph Teacher Training Institute of the year 2007-2008, the subject matter of W.P.No.11699 of 2009, this Court by order dated 26.6.2009 in M.P.No.1 of 2009 has permitted the students to write their second year examination scheduled to commence on 30.6.2009 with the same directions, namely not to publish their results and that the same is subject to the result of the writ petition, stating that no right shall be deemed to have been conferred on the students or the institution. 10.4. In W.P.No.10819 of 2009 in respect of Senthil Teacher Training Institute, Puducherry, for the year 2008-2009, it is seen that by an order dated 18.6.2009 passed in M.P.No.2 of 2009, this Court has permitted the students to take up their first year examination commencing from 22.6.2009 with the same conditions. 10.5. Similar relief was granted by order dated 19.6.2009 in M.P.No.2 of 2009 in W.P.No.10923 of 2009, in respect of students of St.Joseph Teacher Training Institute, Karaikal of the year 2008-2009. 10.6. That was also the order dated 22.6.2009 passed in M.P.No.2 of 2009 in W.P.No.11140 of 2009 in respect of the students of Paaventhar Teacher Training Institute of the year 2008-2009 permitting the students to take up their first year examination. 10.7. Thus, the students of the said three institutions have taken up their first year examination in D.T.Ed. course and are continuing their second year course for which the examination is due in June, 2010. 11.1. In the counter affidavits filed by the Directorate of