IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 18TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 29TH MAGHA 1931 WP(C).No. 13316 of 2008(I) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- THE CENTRE CO-ORDINATOR, UNIVERSAL EMPIRE INSITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, COCHIN. BY ADV. SRI.KURIAN GEORGE KANNANTHANAM, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.TONY GEORGE KANNANTHANAM SRI.C.S.DIAS RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, REPRESENTED BY REGISTRAR, PRIYADARSINI HILLS, KOTTAYAM. 2. THE REGISTRAR, MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, PRIYADARSINI HILLS, KOTTAYAM. ADV. SRI. T.A. SHAJI, SC, M.G.UNIVERSITY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.13316/2008 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1 : COPY OF MANUAL OF UGC SCHEMES PAGE NO.389 & 390 PUBLISHED BY THE UGC. P2 : COPY OF COMMUNICATION DATED 26/02/2008 ISSUED FROM THE DIRECTOR OF SCHOOL OF DISTANCE EDUCATION, M.G.UNIVERSITY. P3 : COPY OF ADMISSION NOTIFICATION 2006-07 OF M.G.UNIVERSITY. P4 : COPY OF ORDER PASSED IN WP(C) NO.13316/2008 BY THIS HONOURABLE COURT. P5 : COPY OF PROSPECTUS FOR 2007-08. P6 : COPY OF 1ST PAGE OF ADMISSION NOTIFICATION FOR 2007-08 P7 : COPY OF LETTER DATED 15/11/2007 OF M.G.UNIVERSITY. P8 : COPY OF ORDER DATED 23/03/2009 OF M.G. UNIVERSITY. P9 : COPY OF ORDER DATED 29/06/2009 OF M.G.UNIVERSITY. P10 : COPY OF FIRST TWO PAGES OF THE ORDER DATED 21/03/2003 OF M.G.UNIVERSITY. P11 : COPY OF THE PAGE 1 OF THE BOOKLET TITLED LIST OF DEGREES AND EXAMS OF OTHER UNIVERSITIES RECOGNIZED BY M.G.UNIVERSITY. P11(a) : COPY OF THE PAGE 2 OF THE BOOKLET TITLED LIST OF DEGREES AND EXAMS OF OTHER UNIVERSITIES RECOGNIZED BY M.G.UNIVERSITY. P11(b) : COPY OF THE PAGE 3 OF THE BOOKLET TITLED LIST OF DEGREES AND EXAMS OF OTHER UNIVERSITIES RECOGNIZED BY M.G.UNIVERSITY. P11 (c) : COPY OF THE PAGE 4 OF THE BOOKLET TITLED LIST OF DEGREES AND EXAMS OF OTHER UNIVERSITIES RECOGNIZED BY M.G.UNIVERSITY. P11(d) : COPY OF THE PAGE 14 OF THE BOOKLET TITLED LIST OF DEGREES AND EXAMS OF OTHER UNIVERSITIES RECOGNIZED BY M.G.UNIVERSITY. //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE. jg ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No.13316 of 2008 (I) --------------------------------- Dated, this the 18th day of February, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is the Central Co-ordinator of the Universal Empire Institute of Technology, Cochin, which has established at Dubai, an Off Campus Study Centre of the 1st respondent University, where, under the Distance Education Programme various courses of the M.G.University are conducted. 2. In so far as this writ petition is concerned, the petitioner enrolled certain students at their campus at Dubai, for M.B.A.Course conducted by the respondent University. When the list of the students was sent to the University for registration for the purpose of University Examination, by Ext.P2 communication issued by the University, applications submitted in respect of the 3 students mentioned therein were rejected for the reason that the qualifying courses of these students were not recognised by the 1st respondent University. It was thereupon that this writ petition was filed challenging Ext.P2 communication. 3. At the stage of admission, this Court passed order dated WP(C) No.13316/2008 -2- 18/04/2008 directing the University to receive required fees from the students mentioned in Ext.P2 and permit them to appear for the University Examination for M.B.A Course provisionally, and subject to the result of the writ petition. Accordingly, the students were allowed to appear in the examination on a provisional basis. But, however, their results have not been declared. 4. Contention raised by the learned senior counsel for the petitioner is that the courses are conducted by the University under the Distance Education Programme subject to UGC norms. It is stated that Ext.P1 manual of UGC scheme directs that distance education students should be treated at par with regular university and college students in matters of admission to higher courses and in the award of degrees. He also refers to Ext.P3 admission notification issued by the University for the year 2006-07, which also states that the admission is subject to the guidelines of the UGC. It is therefore contended that the UGC having issued directions as above, the University cannot go contrary to what is stated in Ext.P1. Reference is also made to Ext.P5, the prospectus published by the University for the academic year 2007-08, where for M.B.A. Course, the duration of which is 2 years, the qualification WP(C) No.13316/2008 -3- for admission is a University Degree in any subject and pass in entrance test conducted by School of Distance Education and it is stated that no distinction is made between Regular Courses and others. Learned counsel also makes reference to Ext.P9 & 11, which are the resolution passed by the Academic Council of the University and the list of degrees and examinations of other Universities and Institutions recognised by the respondent University respectively. It is stated that no distinction has been made for regular degree courses or degrees awarded under the Distance Education Programme. Judgments were also cited to contend that since in Ext.P5 prospectus no distinction is made between the regular degrees and the degrees awarded under the Distance Education Programme, it is impermissible for the University to deny registration to the students sought for by the petitioner. 5. Counter affidavit has been filed by the respondent University. In the counter affidavit, the stand taken is that the University has issued a list of recognised courses of various Universities in India and that in the list of recognised courses, B.Com Degree through the Distance Education Programme of the Mumbai University is not included. It is stated that since the WP(C) No.13316/2008 -4- petitioner is having the list of recognised courses, and therefore at the time when admissions were given, the petitioner ought to have verified and complied with the eligibility criteria specified by the University. On this basis, it is contended that the students whose registrations have been rejected by Ext.P2 were ineligible to be admitted for the reason that what they possess is only unrecognised degrees. 6. Ext.P3 is the admission notification, which says that conduct of the course is subject to the guidelines of UGC and as per the Rules of the University. Ext.P1 reflects the guidelines of the UGC, which states that the distance education students should be treated at par with regular University students in the matter of admission to higher courses and in the award of degrees. That apart, in Ext.P5 prospectus issued by the University also no distinction is made by the University between the students who have obtained qualification under the regular scheme and under the Distance Education Programme. Even in Exts.P9 & P11, the resolution of the Academic Council and the list of the recognised courses, what is recognised are degrees and there also no distinction is made. WP(C) No.13316/2008 -5- 7. If that be the factual position, the records produced by the petitioner do not indicate that the University made any distinction between in the matter of degrees obtained by the regular students and the students under the Distance Education Programme in the matter of admission to the courses under the Distance Education Programme. If that be the situation, in my view, there cannot be any justification for the University to decline registration to the students on the ground that the degree they possess is obtained under the Distance Eduction Programme. If so, the stand taken by the University in Ext.P2 is incorrect and cannot be sustained. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of quashing Ext.P2 and directing that the respondent University shall treat the admission of the students as regular for all purposes and publish the results of the examinations undertaken by the students concerned, on the production of a copy of this judgment. This writ petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg