JUDGMENT
K.S. Radhakrishnan, J.
1. Petitioners represent some of the colleges affiliated to the various Universities in the State of Kerala. They are aggrieved by the direction given to conduct election to the College Unions following the presidential system of election and not the parliamentary form of election. Some of the affiliated colleges are now following the parliamentary system of election to college unions.
2. The Mahatma Gandhi University issued letter dated 29.10.2003 to the petitioner in Writ Petition (C) No. 36788 of 2003 to conduct election in their college in accordance with the schedule mentioned therein. The said letter was followed by another letter dated 15.11.2003. Direction was also issued on the basis of the decision of the Syndicate. Affiliated colleges were directed to conduct election in accordance with the Rules for the Conduct of Elections to College Unions contained in the Constitution for College Unions and reminded them of the undertaking made by them as per statute 9(6) of Chapter 23 of the Mahatma Gandhi University Statutes, 1997. Further it was also stated therein that as per Chapter 23 of Mahatma Gandhi University First Statutes 1997 affiliated colleges are bound to comply with all the provisions of the Act, Statutes, Ordinances and Regulations and directions issued by the University from time to time. Affiliated colleges were informed that they shall not violate the directions given by the University. Writ petitioners are aggrieved by the directions issued by the University. Writ Petition (C) No. 29547 of 2003 was also filed by Council of Principals of Colleges in Kerala against similar directions given by the University of Calicut. They maintain the stand that they are entitled to follow a system which would enable them to maintain discipline in their colleges. They propose to follow and some of them are following the parliamentary system of election. They submit that the local bodies, such as Panchayat, Municipality, Corporation etc. are all following that system. Advantages of following the parliamentary system of election were also highlighted by the counsel appearing for the affiliated colleges. Reference was also made to the counter affidavit filed in O.P. No. 15204 of 1996 wherein Government have also advocated for the conduct of election in colleges following the parliamentary system and not the presidential system.
3. Universities have filed counter affidavits. They took up the stand that the Syndicate has got power to decide the type of system to be followed by the various affiliated colleges for college union elections. Reference was also made to various provisions of the Mahatma Gandhi University Act and Statutes. Reference was specifically made to Clause (7) of the bye laws of the Mahatma Gandhi University Union and also to Statute 9(6) of Chapter XXIII of the Mahatma Gandhi University First Statutes 1991. Counsel appearing for the writ petitioners contended that Clause (7) of the Bye laws of the Mahatma Gandhi University Union has no statutory force and the petitioners are not bound to follow the same. The bye laws should bind only Mahatma Gandhi University Union and not the affiliated colleges.
4. We directed the counsel appearing for the University to produce Clause (7) of the bye laws of the Mahatma Gandhi University Union. Counsel could not produce the same. The Constitution for College Unions framed under Clause (7) of the Bye laws produced. The question that is posed for consideration is whether Clause (7) of the constitution for college unions would bind the affiliated colleges. We are of the view, such a provision has no statutory force. We may in this connection refer to some of the provisions of the Mahatma Gandhi University Act and the University Statutes 1997. “Students’ Council” is defined in Section 2(27) of the Mahatma Gandhi University Act. Section 5 of the Act refers to powers of the University. Section 16 of the Act deals with Authorities of the University which includes the Students’ Council. Students’ Council defined in Section 2(27) of the Act means the Students’ Council of the University. The Constitution for College Unions framed under Clause (7) of the Bye laws of the Mahatma Gandhi University Union does not refer to Students’ Council. Therefore College Union is not an authority under the University Act. Further, Section 29 of the Mahatma Gandhi University Act also refers to Students’ Council. Powers and duties of the Students’ Council are dealt with in Section 30 of the Act. Section 41 of the Act deals with rules, bye laws and orders. Constitution of College Union is not mentioned in the bye law. The Syndicate shall have power to make rules, bye laws and orders consistent with the provisions of the Act. No bye laws have been framed by the Syndicate in accordance with Section 41 so as to bind the various affiliated colleges.
5. We may also in this connection refer to the Report of the Commission constituted by the Government to enquire into the working of the Mahatma Gandhi University, which is popularly called Perumal Commission Report. Learned Government Pleader has produced relevant portion of the report before us. After taking note of all relevant aspects, the Commission has opined that indirect method of election may be adopted for college unions in order to reduce indiscipline, violence and chaos in the campus. Taking into consideration all the relevant aspects including the stand of State Government and the Perumal Commission Report and the fact that the bye laws have no statutory force, we are inclined to take the view that affiliated colleges are not legally obliged to follow the “constitution for college unions” framed under Clause (7) of the Mahatma Gandhi University Union. In this connection, we may refer to the decision of the Apex Court in State of West Bengal and Ors. v. Vishnunarayan and Associates Pvt. Ltd. (2002) 4 SCC 134) wherein the court held that the State or its executive officers cannot interfere with the rights of others except where their actions are authorised by a specific provision of law. The letters issued by the University, in our view, have no statutory support and Clause (7) of the Mahatma Gandhi University Union is not binding on the affiliated colleges.
6. The University letters dated 29.10.2003 and 15.11.2003 cannot therefore be legally sustained. University has also taken up the stand that those letters could be sustained under statute 9(6) of Chapter XXIII. We may refer to the said provision. Statute 9 deals with grant of affiliation. Statute 9(6) says that the educational agency/management shall give an undertaking to the University to carry out faithfully, the provisions of the Act, Statutes, Ordinances and Regulations and the directions issued by the University, from time to time, in so far as they are related to the college. First of all it is not a direction concerning affiliation. Further the direction has no statutory force. University is relying on the Constitution of College Unions framed under Clause (7) of the bye laws of the Mahatma Gandhi University Union which is not binding on the affiliated colleges. In such circumstances the direction given in the letters to conduct election following the presidential system of election cannot be sustained and the affiliated colleges are free to follow a system which is better for the administration and discipline in the colleges. The Writ Petitions are allowed accordingly. The direction to conduct election following the presidential system of election will stand set aside.