IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 19TH AUGUST 2011 / 28TH SRAVANA 1933 WP(C).No. 15258 of 2011(F) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- ABDUL KHARIM.A, S/O.LATE ABDUL HAKKIM, "PRASANTHI", T.C.9/1609, CHEKKALAMUKKU, KARIYAM ROAD, SREEKARYAM, TRIVANDRUM-695 017. BY ADV. SRI.MILLU DANDAPANI RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE REGISTRAR, UNIVERSITY OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 034. 2. THE REGISTRAR, GURU GHASIDAS UNIVERSITY, KONI, BILASPUR-495 009 (CHHATTISGARH). 3. THE CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATIONS, INSTITUTE OF DISTANT EDUCATION, UNIVERSITY OFFICE, GURU GHASIDAS UNIVERSITY, KONI, BILASPUR-495 009 (CHHATTISGARH). 4. THE PRINCIPAL, KERALA LAW ACADEMY, PEROORKKADA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 005. ADV. SRI.M.RAJAGOPALAN NAIR FOR R1 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 15258 of 2011 APPENDIX EXHIBITS EXT.P1- PHOTOCOPY OF DEGREE CERTIFICATE IN BACHELOR OF ARTS EXAMINATION IN FIRST DIVISION ISSUED FROM THE 2ND RESPONDENT UNIVERSITY TO THE PETITIONER EXT.P2- PHOTOCOPY OF LETTER DATED 25.2.08 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT UNIVERSITY TO THE PETITIONER EXT.P3- PHOTOCOPY OF MEMO NO.AC.C1/30650/09 DATED 18.2.09 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER EXT.P4- TRUE COPY OF COVERING LETTER VIDE NO.94/IDB/09 DATED 23.4.09 OF THE CHIEF CO-ORDINATOR OF 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER EXT.P5- TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 29.4.09 OF THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT EXT.P5(a)- PHOTOCOPY OF RECEIPT EVIDENCING REMITTANCE OF RS.500/- BY THE PETITIONER EXT.P6- TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 12.7.10 OF THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT EXT.P7- PHOTOCOPY OF MEMO NO.AC.C1/43772/2010 DATED 20.10.10 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P8- TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 25.11.10 OF THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT EXT.P9- TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 26.11.08 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT ADDRESSED TO THE PETITIONER WITH ENGLISH TRANSLATED VERSION EXT.P9(a)- TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 14.11.08 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT ADDRESSED TO THE PETITIONER WITH ENGLISH TRANSLATED VERSION EXT.P10- TRUE COPY OF INFORMATION RECEIVED BY THE PETITIONER UNDER RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT FROM THE PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT VIDE NO.PRO/PIO/2554/2010 DATED 22.10.10 (True Copy) P.A. To Judge ANTONY DOMINIC, J ....................................................... W.P.(C).15258/2011 .............................................. Dated this the 19th day of August, 2011 JUDGMENT The prayers sought in the writ petition are the following:- (i). Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the 1st respondent to provide Eligibility Certificate for B.A.Degree issued by the 2nd respondent, to the petitioner, forthwith. (ii). Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the 1st respondent to publish the result of the 6th semester LLB Degree course appeared by the petitioner and issue the Degree certificate, forthwith. 2. On the strength of a Degree, which the petitioner acquired from the Guru Ghasidas University, Koni, Bilaspur, in Chattisgarh State, under the Distance Education Programme of that University, petitioner joined the fourth respondent College for LLB Course. His result was not published and that led the petitioner to file this writ petition. W.P.(C).15258/11 2 3. A statement has been filed by the learned Standing Counsel for the first respondent University from which it appears that the petitioner had applied for eligibility certificate for the B.A Economics Degree (Distance) awarded by the aforesaid University on 14.7.2008 and that since the Course was not recognized by the first respondent University, the same was informed to him by Ext.P3. Therefore, the petitioner applied for Course recognition along with the supporting documents. Statement further shows that from the documents produced by the petitioner, the first respondent came to know that the University from which the petitioner acquired his degree is not approved by the Distance Education Council. 3. Therefore, as at present according to the first respondent University, the third respondent neither has approval from the Distance Education Council nor is the Degree awarded by the third respondent a recognized one by the first respondent. 4. Although referring to Ext.P9, petitioner contends that the University does enjoy the approval of the Distance Education W.P.(C).15258/11 3 Council, it is beyond dispute that the Degree, which the petitioner acquired from the aforesaid University, is not one which is recognized by the first respondent University. Unless the qualifying degree is a recognized one, this Court cannot direct the first respondent University to publish the result of the LLB Course, which the petitioner underwent in the fourth respondent College. In the above view of the matter, this Court will not be justified in granting the reliefs sought in the writ petition. Writ petition is dismissed. ANTONY DOMINIC, Judge mrcs