IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 33088 of 2008(L)
1. ST.ALBERT'S COLLEGE, ERNAKULAM 682018,
... Petitioner
2. PRINCIPAL, ST.ALBERT'S COLLEGE,
Vs
1. MAHATMA GANDHI UNVERSITY, REPRESENTED
... Respondent
2. VICE CHANCELLOR, MAHATMA GANDHI
For Petitioner :SRI.BABY ISSAC ILLICKAL
For Respondent :SRI. T.A. SHAJI, SC, M.G.UNIVERSITY
The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC
Dated :06/01/2009
O R D E R
ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
---------------------------
W.P.(C) No. 33088 of 2008
------------------------------------
Dated this the 6th day of January, 2009
JUDGMENT
The 1st petitioner is a college affiliated to the first respondent
University and the 2nd petitioner is its principal. According to the
petitioners, the Ministry of Science and Technology of the Government of
India sanctioned an amount of Rs.36,00,000/- to the college in order to
strengthen the Post Graduate Teaching and Research in the field of science.
Utilising the said funds, the petitioners wanted to import certain
sophisticated instruments. This required as an Essentiality Certificate from
the respondent University for claiming exemption from the duties levied by
the Central Excise and Customs Departments.
2. For the issuance of the Essentiality Certificate, petitioners
submitted Exhibit P5 application before the University. But the University
has not so far passed orders on Exhibit P5, while according to the
petitioners, similarly situated colleges which have applied for the same
certificate have already been issued the same. It is stated that University is
acting with vengeance in delaying the certificate on extraneous
considerations.
3. According to the University, since the petitioner has been
consistently disobeying the University and its regulations, proceeding have
W.P.(C) No. 33088 / 2008
2
already been initiated to withdraw the affiliation granted to the 1st petitioner
college. The decision of the University in this regard is pending approval of
this Court in W.P(C) No.27585 of 2007. The University submits that it is
because of the pendency of the aforesaid proceedings that they have not
considered the application made by the petitioner.
4. Irrespective of the pendency of proceedings against the college,
fact remains that as on the date, the college is still functions as an affiliated
college. So long as the 1st petitioner is an affiliated college, it is entitled to
all the privileges that are attached to the affiliation that it enjoys. That the
proceeding are pending, cannot be a reason for the University to decline
Essentiality Certificate sought for by the petitioner. In view of this, I cannot
uphold the inaction on the part of the University in passing orders on
Exhibit P5 application made by the petitioner. Therefore, the University is
directed to pass orders granting Essentiality Certificate to the college based
on Exhibit P5 application made by the 1st petitioner college.
This shall be done expeditiously as possible at any rate within four
weeks from the date of production of copy of this judgment.
ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE
scm