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 THURSDAY, THE 24TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 3RD AGRAHAYANA 1933 WA.No. 1790 of 2011() --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.25361/2011 Dated 18/10/2011 .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONER ----------------------------------------- PRAVASI INTERNATIONAL EDUCATIONAL CHARITABLE TRUST, REGISTRATION NO. 262/2003, MALAPPURAM, MANJERI ROAD, OPPOSITE TOWN HALL, UP HILL, MALAPPURAM - 676 506, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, KRISHNADAS.C.K. BY ADV. SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS ------------------------------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, CALICUT UNIVERSITY POST, PIN - 673 635. 3. VICE CHANCELLOR, UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT, CALICUT UNIVERSITY POST, PIN - 673 635. 4. REGISTRAR, UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT, CALICUT UNIVERSITY POST, PIN - 673 635. R1 BY SR.GOVT.PLEADER SMT.K.MEERA THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: MANJULA CHELLUR, Ag.C.J & P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. ---------------------------------------------- W.A.No. 1790 of 2011 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 24th day of November, 2011 JUDGMENT Ramachandra Menon J. Whether the interference is declined by the learned Single Judge with regard to the claim of the petitioner to grant affiliation for the academic year 2011-2012, confining the relief by directing the University to consider the claim in respect of the next academic year, i.e., 2012-13 is correct or not, is the question involved in this appeal. 2. The appellant is a 'charitable trust' formed by the people belonging to the State of Kerala, who are working abroad. With intent to set up an educational institution, the appellant submitted Exhibit P1 application before the respondent University, seeking affiliation for various courses such as B.Com, B.A (Functional English), B.B.A, B.Sc (Physics) and B.Sc (Mathematics). Incidentally, it is brought to our notice that the present claim is only in respect of the first three Arts Subjects, i.e., B.Com., B.A (Fjunctional English) and B.B.A. WA.1790/11 2 3. As given by the appellant in Exhibit P1 application form, the location was shown at the particular site/building and inspection was conducted by the Inspection Team of the University, who submitted Exhibit P4 report recommending grant of affiliation for the academic year 2011-2012. But, the petitioner/appellant submitted Exhibit P7 application dated 23.3.2011 changing the site and in the said circumstance, the matter could not have been considered with reference to the site already inspected by the Inspection Team. Pursuant to the said application, a further inspection was done by the Inspection Team and Exhibit P8 report was submitted on 18.6.2011. Alleging callous action on the part of the respondents, the appellant approached this Court by filing W.P(C).No.20648 of 2011, which was disposed of as per Exhibit P12 judgment, directing to have the matter considered and finalised within the time as stipulated therein. 4. Pursuant to the above verdict, the matter was placed for consideration before the Vice-Chancellor of the University, when it was observed that Exhibit P11 'NOC' issued by the Government for starting the College was in respect of the previous location, WA.1790/11 3 which was already sought to be changed by the appellant by submitting Exhibit P7. In the said circumstances, the Vice- Chancellor passed Exhibit P14 order to ascertain whether the appellant/petitioner was having 'own building' and such other infrastructure, so as to consider the question of affiliation. In furtherance to the said proceeding, a further inspection was conducted and Exhibit P15 report was submitted, the crux of which says that there was no sufficient extent of land required as per the Statute; that no permanent or temporary building was constructed and further that there was no requisite infrastructure at the venue where the College was proposed to be started. It was in the said circumstances, that the present Writ Petition came to be filed by the petitioner/appellant, seeking for affiliation to be granted in respect of the academic year 2011-2012 itself. After considering the sequence of events, the learned Single Judge observed that the said claim could not have been acceded to under any circumstance and that the outcome of the subsequent inspection could be made use of in respect of the affiliation to be given for the next academic year, i.e., 2012-2013, which is under challenge in this appeal. WA.1790/11 4 5. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that because of the stand taken by the learned Single Judge, much loss and hardship has already been resulted to the appellant, who has invested huge amounts for setting up the infrastructure. It is also stated that, a number of students have already been given admission and if the judgment passed by the learned Single Judge is let to stand, the same will adversely affect the career and prospects of the students as well. 6. The above submission is sought to be controverted by the learned Standing Counsel for the University, who submits that the last date for giving admission is already over, which was on 20th September, 2011. It is also stated that, most of the classes are also over and that the examinations are scheduled to be conducted in January, 2012. The learned Standing Counsel further submits that there was absolutely no case for the appellant in the Writ Petition that the admission had already been given to the students, as now stated in the synopsis and so also in Ground B of the Writ Appeal. The learned Standing Counsel adds that, no such exercise could ever have been pursued by the appellant, for the obvious reason that it is totally alien to the scheme of the Statute WA.1790/11 5 and that all the communications issued by the University earlier also did clearly convey the appellant that admission of the students could be effected only after obtaining the affiliation. 7. The learned counsel for the appellant, when confronted with the position above submits that the reference made to the proceedings in the appeal, as to the admission given, is only with respect to the course pursued in respect of some private students. The learned counsel submits that the private students could be imparted training or academic instructions by the appellant institution and that such students are very much entitled to have direct affiliation from the University. In view of the said submission, it goes without saying that, so as to have the affiliation or permission to participate in the examination conducted by the University for such private students, the involvement of the appellant institution is not at all required and for that reason, there need not be any affiliation for the present academic year, i.e., 2011-2012. In other words, the statement in the Writ Appeal that the appellant has already given admission does not pertain to the admission of any 'regular student'. This being the position, this Court is not called upon to consider the WA.1790/11 6 fate of the regular students with regard to the question of admission sought for in respect of the academic year 2011-2012. We also note that major extent of the current academic year is almost over, today being 24th November, 2011 and the entire courses and curriculum have to be completed within a couple of months, more so when the examination is scheduled to be conducted in January, 2012 or nearby dates. Considering the matter as a whole, we find that the finding and reasoning given by the learned Single Judge does not call for any interference. 8. Going by the admitted sequences of events, we find that Exhibit P1 application for granting affiliation for the year 2011- 2012, was originally considered by the University and affiliation was granted. But, it was only later, that the appellant chose to change the location by submitting Exhibit P7 and this necessitated further steps/proceedings. In view of the fact that the application preferred by the appellant was considered and positive/favourable orders were passed by the University by granting affiliation in respect of the academic year 2011-2012, we do not find any element of malafides or any adverse design/course on the part of the University with regard to the WA.1790/11 7 claim made by the appellant for having affiliation. For this reason also, no interference is called for. 9. During the course of hearing, it is brought to the notice of this Court that after passing the verdict by the learned Single Judge, the University deputed the Inspection Team to inspect the changed premises, as per order dated 27.10.2011, constituting Committee in this regard. As per Annexure A2, a report of the Committee is called for. The learned Standing Counsel for the University submits that the proceedings, particularly the inspection and the report are still to be finalised and on getting the report, the matter would be placed for consideration before the competent authority and the question of affiliation for the next academic year, i.e., 2012-2013 will definitely be considered and appropriate orders will be passed. Going by the sequence of events, we also find by the admitted without delay. 10. In view of the turn of events, the University shall not insist the appellant to 're-do' the entire process with regard to the affiliation for the next academic year 2012-2013 and the matter could be pursued from the stage where Annexure A2 has been passed. We further make it clear that the proceedings as above WA.1790/11 8 shall be finalised by the University as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, on or before 31.1.2012. The Writ Appeal stands dismissed with the above observations. MANJULA CHELLUR, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE vgs