IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT:- THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.H.L.DATTU & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH MONDAY, THE 31ST MARCH 2008 / 11TH CHAITHRA 1930 W.A.No.663 of 2008 --------------------------------------- AGAINST THE INTERIM ORDER IN W.P.(C).NO.32256/2007 DATED 12/11/2007 .................... APPELLANTS: RESPONDENTS:- ---------------------------------------------- 1. MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, PRIYADARSHINI HILLS, ATHIRAMPUZHA, KOTTAYAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR. 2. THE VICE CHANCELLOR, M.G. UNIVERSITY, KOTTAYAM. BY STANDING COU8NSEL SRI. T.A. SHAJI. RESPONDENT: PETITIONER:- ------------------------------------------- JOHN PAUL MEMORIAL B.ED COLLEGE, LABBAKKADA, KANCHIYAR P.O., IDUKKI DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY THE MANAGER FR.JOSEPH KATTACKAL. BY ADV.SRI.GEORGE POONTHOTTAM. THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: H.L.DATTU, C.J. & K.M.JOSEPH, J. ------------------------------------------ W.A.No.663 of 2008 ------------------------------------------ Dated, this the 31st day of March, 2008 JUDGMENT H.L.Dattu, C.J. Mahatma Gandhi University ('the University' for short) aggrieved by the interim order passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) No.32256 of 2007 dated 12th November, 2007 is before us in this writ appeal. 2. Petitioner is an educational institution. It had approached the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE) for grant of recognition under the National Council for Teacher Education Act, 1993 ('NCTE Act' for short). The NCTE has granted recognition under Section 14(3)(a) of the NCTE Act. 3. After obtaining such recognition from NCTE, the petitioner college has approached the University to grant of affiliation to commence B.Ed. Course in their college. Since their application was not disposed of by the University within a reasonable time, the petitioner was constrained to approach this Court for appropriate directions. 4. In the writ petition filed, the petitioner had taken up primarily two contentions, firstly, that since NCTE had already granted recognition under Section 14(3)(a) of the NCTE Act, the University was obliged to grant affiliation to the course which the college intends to commence in their college. In support of that contention reliance was placed on the decision of the apex Court in the case of State of Maharashtra v. Sant Dnyaneshwar Shikshan Shastra Mahavidyalaya and others, (2006) 9 SCC page 1, wherein at paragraph 80, the Supreme Court has stated as under: W.A.No.663 of 2008 2 “80. In our opinion, the observations that the provisions of Sections 82 and 83 of the Maharashtra Universities Act are “null and void” could not be said to be correct. To us, it appears that what the High Court wanted to convey was that the provisions of Sections 82 and 83 would not apply to an institution covered by the 1993 Act. As per the scheme of the Act, once recognition has been granted by NCTE under Section 14(6) of the Act, every university (“examining body”) is obliged to grant affiliation to such institution and Sections 82 and 83 of the University Act do not apply to such cases.” 5. It is also contended by the petitioner college that the University is adopting different yardsticks while granting either permanent affiliation or provisional affiliation to the colleges which would come within their jurisdiction. In support of that contention the petitioner had produced along with the writ petition papers an order passed by the University dated 31.10.2007 in the case of Jayaraj Training College, Ernakulam. 6. The learned Single Judge keeping in view the observations made by the apex Court in Sant Dnyaneshwar Shikshan Shastra Mahavidyalaya's case has directed the University to grant provisional affiliation to the petitioner college to commence B.Ed. Course for the academic year 2007-08. The learned Single Judge has also made it clear that the petitioner college would inform the students who would join the course that their admission is only provisional and is subject to the final result in the writ petition. Aggrieved by the said interim order so passed by the learned Single Judge the University is before us in this appeal. 7. Sri.T.A.Shaji, learned standing counsel appearing for the University would submit that the directions issued by the learned Single Judge would run W.A.No.663 of 2008 3 counter and contrary to Chapter 23 of the Mahatma Gandhi University Statutes, 1997 ('the Statutes' for short). In support of the contention, he would place reliance on clause 1 of the said Chapter to suggest that the petitioner college was expected to file application for grant of affiliation on or before 31st of January preceding the academic year in which the courses are proposed to be started. Learned counsel also brings to our notice clause 6 of Chapter 23 of the Statutes which authorises the Syndicate of the University to consider application for grant of affiliation on or before 31st May preceding the academic year in which the courses are proposed to be started. 8. For the present, we do not intend to look into those statutory provisions as similar provisions were also available when the apex Court decided the case of Sant Dnyaneshwar Shikshan Shastra Mahavidyalaya. The Court has taken note of clauses 82 and 83 of the Maharashtra Universities Act and thereafter has observed that once a recognition is granted by the NCTE, it is expected of the University to grant affiliation to the college. 9. It is not in dispute nor it can be disputed by the University that the petitioner college has obtained recognition from the NCTE on 13.11.2007. The order passed by the NCTE is in exercise of its powers under Section 14(3)(a) of the NCTE Act. 10. In view of the recognition so granted by the NCTE, in our opinion, the learned Single Judge was justified in directing the University to grant provisional affiliation to the petitioner college subject to the final result in the writ petition. 11. The interim order passed by the learned Single Judge, in our opinion, is in consonance with the judgment of the apex Court in the case W.A.No.663 of 2008 4 of Sant Dnyaneshwar Shikshan Shastra Mahavidyalaya. In that view of the matter, we do not intend to take exception to the interim direction issued by the learned Single Judge to the University in the instant case. Accordingly, the writ appeal requires to be rejected and it is rejected. 12. The observations made by us is only for the purpose of disposal of this appeal. These observations would not come in the way of learned Single Judge while deciding the Writ Petition on merits. Ordered accordingly. (H.L.DATTU) CHIEF JUSTICE (K.M.JOSEPH) JUDGE vns/DK.