High Court Kerala High Court

Asok Chacko Thomas vs Mahatma Gandhi University on 14 October, 2009

Kerala High Court
Asok Chacko Thomas vs Mahatma Gandhi University on 14 October, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 8289 of 2009(E)


1. ASOK CHACKO THOMAS, NEDUVELIL HOUSE,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. PRAJEESH.A., PRASANTHY HOUSE,

                        Vs



1. MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, REPRESENTED
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE REGISTRAR, MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY

3. THE UNIVERSITY GRANTS COMMISSION,

4. THE NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF ADVANCED

5. THE UNION OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF HUMAN

                For Petitioner  :SRI.V.JOHN MANI

                For Respondent  :SRI.BENOY K.KADAVAN

The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC

 Dated :14/10/2009

 O R D E R
                      ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
             --------------------------------------------------
                 W.P.(C) NO.8289 OF 2009 (E)
             --------------------------------------------------
          Dated this the 14th day of October, 2009

                          J U D G M E N T

Counsel for the petitioners submit that the first petitioner

alone is interested in prosecuting the writ petition. This

submission is recorded.

2. First petitioner is a graduate from the National University

of Advanced Legal Studies, the 4th respondent in this writ petition.

Ext.P1 is his Degree Certificate. Thereafter he joined 3 year LLM

course conducted by respondents 1 and 2 at the study center at

St.Paul’s College, Kalamassery and commenced his studies.

According to the Ist petitioner, while so on 22.12.2008, he was

summoned by the Course Coordinator and was directed to

produce Eligibility Certificate issued by the first respondent

University. Petitioner submits that, thereupon he made an

application for Eligibility Certificate, but however the certificate

was not issued by respondents 1 and 2. Thereupon though he

made Ext.P7 representation, there was no reply. It is stated that

for want of Eligibility Certificate he had to discontinue his studies.

In these circumstances, the writ petition was filed praying for

WPC.No.8289/09
:2 :

directing the respondents 1 and 2 to issue Eligibility Certificate

enabling him to continue his studies.

3. On behalf of the Ist respondent, University a statement,

dated 3rd August, 2009 has been filed stating that all regular

degrees conferred by the Universities listed by the Association of

Indian Universities/University Grants Commission have been

recognized by the M.G. University as per its order dated

17.3.1999. It is stated that the name of the 4th respondent is not

seen listed in the hand book published by the Association of

Indian Universities and therefore the University has sought

clarification from the Association of Indian Universities as well as

the University Grants Commission as per Annexures A and B

letters. It is stated that the University will take urgent steps for

issuing Eligibility Certificate immediately on receipt of the

clarification that it has sought, provided the 4th respondent is

recognized and the candidate has undergone course as a regular

student.

4. Affidavits have been filed by respondents 3 and 4 as well.

The 3rd respondent UGC, in paragraph 10 of its affidavit has stated

that the 4th respondent, the National University of Advance Legal

Studies is a State University established under the National

WPC.No.8289/09
:3 :

University of Advanced Legal Studies Act, 2005 and that it is a

University within the meaning of Section 2(f) of the UGC Act 1956,

entitled to confer or award degree specified by UGC as provided

under Section 22 of the UGC Act. It is also stated that presently

the UGC is not maintaining any list of Universities recognized

under Section 2(f) of the Act. The 4th respondent in its counter

affidavit has stated that it is a University entitled to confer

degree and therefore the first respondent University is liable to

issue Eligibility Certificate without any further proceedings. It is

also stated that Association of Indian Universities is a voluntary

organization and that the 4th respondent is not a member of the

Association.

5. I heard the Counsel appearing for the parties. Section

25 of the M.G. University Act, 1985 specifies the powers and

duties of the Academic Council. In terms of sub Section (xi) it is

for the Academic Council to decide on the examinations of the

other universities, which may be treated as equivalent to those

of the University and to negotiate with other Universities for

recognition of examinations of the University. It is in pursuance

to this power that the Academic Council in its meeting held on

10.12.2998 resolved to grant recognition to regular courses/

WPC.No.8289/09
:4 :

degrees of Universities listed by the Association of Indian

Universities/ University Grants Commission from time to time. It is

in pursuance to this decision of the Academic Council that the

University Order dated 17.3.1999, produced along with the memo

dated 5th October, 2009, has been issued. A perusal of the

aforesaid resolution of the Academic Council shows that any

regular course/degree of universities listed by the Association of

Indian Universities/UGC stands automatically recognized by the

first respondent University.

6. Section 2(f) of the UGC Act defines a University as one

established or incorporated by or under a Central Act, a provincial

Act or a State Act and includes any such Universities as may in

consultation with the University concerned is recognized by the

Commission in accordance with the resolutions under the UGC

Act, 1956. Universities defined in Section 2(f) are entitled to

confer Degrees in view of Section 22 of the UGC Act referred to

above.

7. The 4th respondent is a University established under the

National University and Advance Legal Studies Act, 2005(Act 27

of 2005), a State Act, and this fact has been recognized by the

UGC in paragraph 10 of its counter affidavit. The Ist respondent

WPC.No.8289/09
:5 :

also has no case to the contrary. In the said counter affidavit,

UGC has further accepted that the 4th respondent is entitled to

confer degrees as well. It is also evident from its counter

affidavit that, UGC is not maintaining any list of Universities,

recognized by it. Counter affidavit of the 4th respondent also

shows that it is a University and that it is not a member of the

Association of Indian Universities, which is only a voluntary

organization. In such a situation, the resolution of the Academic

Council granting automatic recognition to courses/ degrees will

not come to the rescue of students of the respondent University

like the petitioner since the 4th respondent is not included in the

list maintained by the Association of Indian Universities and as

UGC is not maintaining any list. However, that does not mean

that the future of the students can be at peril and the Ist

respondent cannot be a silent spectator. Since the counter

affidavit of the UGC accepts the fact that the 4th respondent is a

University as defined in Section 2(f) entitled to confer degree as

provided in Section 22 of the UGC Act and in the absence of any

list maintained by the UGC, I do not think that there is any

rationale in the first respondent University insisting on

recognizing only the regular course/degree of the Universities

WPC.No.8289/09
:6 :

included in the list maintained by the UGC. The Association of

Indian Universities, being only a voluntary organization, none can

compel the 4th respondent to obtain membership in the

Association nor can the Ist respondent make recognition of

courses, conditional on such membership, I am of the view, in

the light of the stand taken by the UGC, fairness requires that

the first respondent University should issue Eligibility Certificate

to the students of the 4th respondent University who have

attended regular courses/degrees. In view of the above, if a

request for Eligibility Certificate is received, what the first

respondent need examine is whether the student concerned has

attended regular courses/degree in the 4th respondent University.

On such verification, if it is satisfied that the student satisfies this

condition, the Ist respondent shall issue an Eligibility Certificate

as sought for.

8. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing that

it will be open to the first petitioner to approach respondents 1

and 2 for the issue of an Eligibility Certificate in which event the

first respondent shall examine whether the first petitioner was a

regular student of course/degree conducted by the 4th

respondent University and if that condition is satisfied, the

WPC.No.8289/09
:7 :

Eligibility Certificate as sought for shall be issued, without ay

further delay.

Writ petition is allowed as above. No costs.

(ANTONY DOMINIC)
JUDGE
vi/