IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MRS.MANJULA CHELLUR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON TUESDAY, THE 15TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 24TH KARTHIKA 1933 WA.No. 1495 of 2011() ----------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.14553/2011 Dated 12/07/2011 .................... APPELLANT(S): APPELLANTS/RESPONDENTS 1 AND 2. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1. MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY,REPRESENTED BY REGISTRAR, KOTTAYAM-686 560. 2. VICE CHANCELLOR, MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, KOTTAYAM-686 560. BY ADV. SRI.M.R.RAJENDRAN NAIR, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI. T.A. SHAJI, SC, M.G.UNIVERSITY RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS AND THE 3RD RESPONDENT --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. MANAGER,MAR AUGUSTHINOSE COLLEGE,RAMAPURAM BAZAR - 686 576. 2. MANAGER, BISHOP VAYALIL MEMORIAL HOLY CORSS COLLEGE, CHERPUNKAL-686 584. 3. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVT.SECRETRIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-01. R1 AND R2 BY ADV.MR.BABY ISSAC ILLIKAL R3 BY SR.GOVT.PLEADER SMT.K.MEERA THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WA.No. 1495 of 2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS ANNEXURE-A. TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 13/09/2010 IN CIVIL APPEAL NO.8003-8006 OF 2010. ANNEXURE-B. TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 1/8/2011. /TRUE COPY/ PS TO JUDGE MANJULA CHELLUR, Ag.C.J & P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. ---------------------------------------------- W.A.No. 1495 of 2011 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 15th day of November, 2011 JUDGMENT Manjula Chellur, Ag.C.J. The Writ Appeal is directed against the judgment of the learned Single Judge wherein Exhibit P2 admission regulations for under graduate courses framed by the appellant-University was inapplicable to Unaided Colleges. Apparently, the unaided self financing colleges approached the learned Single Judge challenging Exhibit P2 regulations mainly contending that the University has no power to take over the right of admission vested with the unaided private college managements as it would be in violation of the fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 30 (1) and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India. It is also not in dispute that the Writ Petition came to be filed within a month from the date of introduction of the order dated 25.4.2011. 2. Admittedly, there was no interim order as such. The learned Single Judge having regard to Section 73A of the Mahatma Gandhi University Act (for short, 'the Act') after securing WA.1495/11 2 information from the Government that no committee was constituted by the Government in terms of said Section ultimately held that the University had no power to issue rules or regulations regulating the admission process so far as unaided self financing institutions. Aggrieved by the same, the University is before us. 3. The contention of the learned Senior Counsel arguing for the appellant is that the respondent-institution never referred to Section 73A of the Act and having regard to the fact that there was no regulatory process as such in unaided institutions, the University brought these regulations in the light of the fact that the Government had not formed such committee. According to the learned Senior Counsel, the inherent power vested in the University under the general powers especially Section 25 of the Act contemplates the powers and duties of the Academic Council, therefore the University was justified in issuing such regulations. 4. As against this, the learned counsel representing the institutions submits that the entire averments in the Writ Petitions impliedly would only challenge power of the University in issuing such regulations. Therefore, irrespective of the fact of non- mentioning of Section 73A, the learned Single Judge was justified in passing the impugned judgment. WA.1495/11 3 5. The learned Government Pleader brings to our notice that as on today, no committee as contemplated under Section 73A of the Act has been formed by the Government. With these facts at our command, when we look at the provision of Section 73A of the Act, definitely it indicates that it is the committee which has to be formed by the Government which alone can regulate the admissions in the unaided self financing institutions. No one including the Court can ignore the Statute, i.e., the provisions contemplated under Section 73A of the Act. Though the Act is of 1985 and the provisions of Section 73A were inserted in the year 1995, till now, no steps of forming a committee as indicated under Section 73A was thought of either by the University or by the Government. In that view of the matter, the only possible way that the University could have proceeded to regulate the admissions in the unaided private institutions was to pursue the Government to form such committee as contemplated under Section 73A of the Act. Observing that there should not be any impediment so far as the admissions made for the academic year 2011-2012, we proceed to say that it is always open to the University to persuade the Government to form such a committee which could regulate the admissions of the unaided self financing institutions. WA.1495/11 4 Accordingly, with the above observations, we dispose of the Writ Appeal. MANJULA CHELLUR, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, , JUDGE vgs