IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 1ST JUNE 2011 / 11TH JYAISHTA 1933 WP(C).No. 10271 of 2011(H) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- K.V.M. TRUST, POST BOX - 30, CHERTHALA, REPRESENTED BY THE DIRECTOR DR. V.V.PYARELAL. BY ADV. MR. GEORGE POONTHOTTAM MR. SUJITH MATHEW JOSE RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. KERALA UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH & ALLIED SCIENCES, MULAMKUNNATHUKAVU, MEDICAL COLLEGE P.O., TRICHUR-680 596, REPRESENTED BY THE REGISTRAR. *2. KERALA NURSES AND MIDWIVES COUNCIL RED CROSS ROAD, THIRVANANTHAPURAM REP. BY THE REGISTRAR (*impleaded as the additional second respondent as per order in I.A. No. 7598 of 2011 dated 25.05.2011) R1 BY ADV. MR. P.SREEKUMAR R2 MR. N.RAGHURAJ, SC, TCMC & KNMC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P (C) No. 10271 of 2011 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated, this the 1st June , 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioner - Trust before this Court, is stated as being aggrieved of the stand taken by the respondent University in the matter of granting affiliation to the M.Sc Nursing Program for the academic 2010 - '11, in tune with Ext. P10 order passed by the Government in supersession of Ext. P9 order passed by the Kerala Nurses and Midwives Counsel, exercising the appellate power vested with the Government in this regard under the relevant provisions of the law. 2. The sequence of events as revealed from materials on records shows that the petitioner was granted necessary sanction by the Nursing Counsel of India, vide Ext. P1 to accommodate 5 students in each of the five specialties during the year 2009 - 10 for the course; whereas the State Nursing Counsel i.e. the additional second respondent herein curtailed the same by restricting admission to two specialties as per Ext. P2. Being aggrieved of the same, the petitioner preferred appeal before the Government under Section 27 of the Nurses and Midwives Act 1953, which culminated in Ext. P3 order, W.P. (C) No. 10271 of 2011 : 2 : wherein some modification was made. The legality of Ext. P3 was challenged by the petitioner by filing W.A. No. 796 of 2010, which led to Ext. P4 judgment dated 08.06.2010. It is stated that, on the basis of the earlier orders passed by the State Nursing Counsel and the Government, the Kerala University (who is not a party of the present proceedings - jurisdiction having been taken over and vested with the first respondent herein) had granted affiliation vide Ext. P5. 3. In the meanwhile, pursuant to the direction given by the Full Bench of this Court as per Ext. P4, the additional 2nd respondent considered the matter for the academic year 2009 - '10 and granted permission for intake of 25 students to be distributed in the 5 specialties vide Ext. P6. As a natural consequence, the University of Kerala gave affiliation for the course, in tune with the permission given by the Kerala Nursing Council as above, vide Ext. P7. 4. The dispute arose with regard to the subsequent academic year 2010 - '11, with the formation of the first respondent University. Though the Nursing Counsel of India earlier gave approval of intake of 25 students in total for 5 specialties with the intake of 5 students each for the academic year 2010 - 11 as well ( as per Ext. P8), the Kerala Nursing Council took a different stand and the intake was reduced to W.P. (C) No. 10271 of 2011 : 3 : the extent as specified in Ext. P9; being aggrieved of which, petitioner preferred appeal before the Government under Section 27 of the Act. After considering the matter, the Government, exercising the appellate power, passed Ext. P10 order, whereby the relief sought for was granted and the respondent University was directed to take necessary steps for granting provisional affiliation. This however was not complied with by the first respondent allegedly referring to the mandate given by the Kerala Nursing Council as per Ext. P9, which according to the petitioner is rather highhanded, in so far as the appeal preferred by the petitioner has been allowed as per Ext. P10, which in turn forms the subject matter of challenge in this writ petition. 5. After filing this writ petition, the Kerala Nursing Council was impleaded in the party array as the additional second respondent. Sri. N. Raghuraj, learned counsel for the said respondent fairly submits that, the rights and liberties of the petitioner as on date, stand concluded by Ext. P10 appellate order, subject to the rider imposed therein as to the satisfaction of the conditions. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, the petitioner has already complied with the requirements and has filed a compliance report. If this be the position, there cannot be any W.P. (C) No. 10271 of 2011 : 4 : grievance for the first respondent University with regard to the granting of affiliation to the petitioner. 7. In the above circumstances, Ext. P16 communication dated 07.03.2011 issued by the first respondent, produced along with I.A. No. 6109 of 2011, is set aside and the first respondent is directed to grant 'provisional affiliation' to the course in question, in terms of Ext. P10 and of course, subject to the satisfaction of the requirements as specified therein. The proceedings as above shall be finalized, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. It is made clear that, this will not bar the way of the second respondent to ensure compliance of the conditions / requirements by the petitioner, as stipulated by the relevant orders / proceedings. The Writ Petition is allowed to the said extent. No cost. P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE kmd