IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON MONDAY, THE 18TH JULY 2011 / 27TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 38547 of 2010(P) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- PRESTIGE EDUCATIONAL TRUST, ANJARAKANDY, PO MAMBA, KANNUR DISTRICT, REP.BY CHAIRMAN MR. M.T.P.ABDUL JABBAR. BY ADV. MR. A.MOHAMED MUSTAQUE MR. K.R.AVINASH (KUNNATH) RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE KANNUR UNIVERSITY, REP.BY ITS REGISTRAR, UNIVERSITY CAMPUS PO, MANGATTUPARAMBA, KANNUR 670 567. 2. THE REGISTRAR,KANNUR UNIVERSITY, MANGATTUPARAMBA, UNIVERSITY CAMPUS PO, KANNUR 670 567. ADV. MR. M.SASEENDRAN, SC, KANNUR UNIVERSITY F THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) 38547 OF 2010 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS : EXT. P1 : TRUE COPY OF THE APPROVAL OF AICTE EXT. P2 : TRUE COPY OF THE APPROVAL OF DIRECTOR OF TECH EDUCATIONAL EXT. P3 : TRUE COPY OF THE CONSENT TO PROVISIONAL AFFILIATION EXT. P4 : TRUE COPY OF THE PRESS RELEASE ISSUED BY 1ST RESPONDENT EXT. P5 : TRUE COPY OF THE AFFILIATION GRANTED BY KANNUR UNIVERSITY EXT. P6 : TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 22.07.2010 EXT. P7 : TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 24.09.2010 EXT. P8 : TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 11.12.2010 EXT. P9 : TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENTIN W.P.(C) NO. 32000/2010 DATED 15.11.2010 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT EXT. P10 : TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION OF THE UNIVERSITY DATED 20.12.2010 /TRUE COPY/ P.A TO JUDGE P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P (C) No . 38547 of 2010 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated, this the 18th July , 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioner institution is seeking for affiliation to be given by the respondent University in respect of B.Tech Mechanical Engineering Course, which request has been turned down by the University allegedly in an arbitrary manner, in spite of the credentials sought to be substantiated, with reference to the relevant materials, which forms the subject matter of challenge in this Writ Petition. 2. The petitioner initially wanted to start 'five programmes' under various faculties, for which necessary sanction was sought for. Ext. P1 is the approval given by the AICTE dated 14.07.2010, wherein the particulars of the five disciplines, in respect of which the sanction was sought for from the AICTE, are discernible. It is stated that the AICTE, considered the matter and gave sanction in respect of all the five programmes. The petitioner contends that, at the relevant time, when application for affiliation was submitted before the University, the petitioner was eligible to have applied only for 'four' courses, by virtue of the norms then in existence. However, in view of the subsequent W.P. (C) No. 38547 of 2010 : 2 : changes in norms, the petitioner became eligible to apply for the 5th programme as well and it was in the said circumstances, that Ext. P8 application was preferred on 11.11.2010. 3. In the meanwhile, the petitioner was constrained to approach this Court by filing W. P.(C) No. 32000 of 2010, culminating in Ext. P9 judgment dated 15.11.2010, whereby the Writ Petition was disposed of, making it clear that, if the petitioner made an application before the respondent University seeking affiliation for B.Tech (Mechanical Engineering), the University shall consider and pass appropriate orders thereon in accordance with law. It is relevant to note that, by this time, the petitioner was given affiliation in respect of 'four' programmes as per Ext. P5 proceedings dated 12.11.2010 issued by the University. Ext. P8 request made by the petitioner, though in tune with Ext. P9 judgment, was rejected by the respondent University as per Ext. P10 order dated 20.12.2011, which is under challenge in this Writ Petition. 4. The respondent University has filed counter affidavit, seeking to sustain Ext. P10. Reference is also made to Statute No. 31 of Chapter V of the Kannur University First Statutes, which reads as follows : W.P. (C) No. 38547 of 2010 : 3 : 31. Accommodation, equipment and strength of students : (1) Admission of students to every college shall be subject to the conditions prescribed by the University, and the strength of the conditions prescribed each call or subject shall not excess the maximum for the class or subject sanctioned by the Syndicate. [The initial maximum student strength in main subjects when Degrees Course are started shall be as follows : For languages 30, Art subject 40 & Science subjects 25. No increase in strength or additional course shall be permitted until the First batch has been presented for the University Examination. When the course become stabilized the strength for main subjects may be increased to : Languages 50, Arts subjects 60, Science subjects (Mathematics, Physics and Chemistry) 50 each and other Science Subjects 40 each. The learned standing counsel appearing for the respondent University submits that the idea and understanding of the petitioner as to the alleged vested right of the petitioner to start 'five' programmes is not correct or sustainable; more so, in view of the clear stipulation under the Statute, which is till to be satisfied. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Statute will not come to the rescue of the University, in so far as the petitioner's case is concerned and it is not covered by the aforesaid provision, W.P. (C) No. 38547 of 2010 : 4 : which deals with an entirely different situation. In the instant case, the petitioner has preferred Ext . P8 application, in view of change in norms, as eligible to apply for affiliation and it was in the said circumstances, that directions were given by this Court as per Ext. P9 judgment. Reasons given in Ext. P10 referring to the Statute is thoroughly wrong and misconceived, submits the learned counsel for the petitioner. 6. During the course of hearing, it is also brought to the notice of this Court that the issue involved in this case is squarely covered as per the decision rendered by the Full Bench of this Court in Vikram Sarabhai E. Trust & B,Ed. College Vs. University of Calicut ( 2008 (2) KLT 1027). In fact, the said verdict was passed placing reliance on the decision rendered by the Apex Court in State of Maharashtra Vs. Sant Dnyaneshwar Shikshan Shastra Mahavidyalaya and Others [(2006) 9 SCC 1). Reference is also made to the decision rendered by the Apex Court in Jaya Gokul Educational Trust Vs. Commissioner and Secretary to Government [2000 (2) KLT 267 (SC)] (Paragraph 28), holding that, once approval of the AICTE is obtained by the concerned college, the University has no right to W.P. (C) No. 38547 of 2010 : 5 : interfere, when non-compliance of conditions is noticed, but for bringing the fact to the notice of the AICTE. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the credentials of the petitioner have already been analysed by the AICTE and sanction was given in respect of all the 'five' courses and this being the position, the objection raised from the part of the University is rather hyper technical and is liable to be intercepted. It is also stated that the contention of the University, as stated in the counter affidavit with reference to the date of application and as to the necessity to have submitted the same in respect of the preceding year, is also not applicable in view of the legal position answered by the Full Bench of this Court in 2008 (2) KLT 1027 (cited supra). 7. After hearing both the sides, this Court finds that, the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner is of considerable force and is to be recognized. So also, the stand taken by the University for rejecting the application as per Ext. P10 does not reconcile with the statutory prescription and this Court does not require any second thought to set aside Ext. P10. However, it is relevant to note that, the application preferred by the petitioner seeking for W.P. (C) No. 38547 of 2010 : 6 : appropriate relief in respect of the previous year cannot be entertained as on this day and the application submitted for affiliation has to be considered only in respect of the current year. 8. In the above facts and circumstances, the University is directed to take all necessary steps for granting provisional affiliation to the course sought to be conducted by the petitioner, vide Ext. P8 and the same shall be finalized within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, depending upon the outcome of the enquiry to be conducted and subject to the conditions to be satisfied by the petitioner in this regard. The Writ Petition is allowed to the above extent. No cost. P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE kmd