{"id":28059,"date":"2009-04-07T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-04-06T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-christian-educational-trust-vs-m-g-university-on-7-april-2009"},"modified":"2017-11-03T21:38:56","modified_gmt":"2017-11-03T16:08:56","slug":"the-christian-educational-trust-vs-m-g-university-on-7-april-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-christian-educational-trust-vs-m-g-university-on-7-april-2009","title":{"rendered":"The Christian Educational Trust vs M.G. University on 7 April, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court<\/div>\n
The Christian Educational Trust vs M.G. University on 7 April, 2009<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM\n\nWP(C).No. 30048 of 2008(B)\n\n\n1. THE CHRISTIAN EDUCATIONAL TRUST,\n                      ...  Petitioner\n\n                        Vs\n\n\n\n1. M.G. UNIVERSITY, KOTTAYAM,\n                       ...       Respondent\n\n2. THE VICE CHANCELLOR,\n\n                For Petitioner  :SRI.GEORGE POONTHOTTAM\n\n                For Respondent  : No Appearance\n\nThe Hon'ble MR. Justice P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON\n\n Dated :07\/04\/2009\n\n O R D E R\n                    P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.                          (CR)\n                   ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\n                       W.P.(C) Nos. 30048 of 2008\n                            and 33006 of 2008\n                   ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\n                   Dated, this the 7th day of April, 2009\n                             J U D G M E N T\n<\/pre>\n
       This is the 3rd or 4th round of litigation being pursued by the<\/p>\n
petitioners in these cases to secure affiliation from the respondent<\/p>\n
University for starting a new college\/course. The application was being<\/p>\n
turned down by the University due to some or other reason, which<\/p>\n
according to the petitioners, is only with malafide exercise of power. For<\/p>\n
convenience of reference to the sequence of events, W.P.(C) No. 30048 of<\/p>\n
2008 is treated as the lead case.\n<\/p>\n
       2. The petitioner in W.P.(C) 30048 of 2008 sought for the affiliation of<\/p>\n
the University to start a new college conducting B.Com with Computer<\/p>\n
Application and such other courses simultaneously submitting all the<\/p>\n
relevant testimonials in connection with the application. After considering<\/p>\n
the application dated 26.09.2005 with respect to the year 2006 and 2007,<\/p>\n
the University as per Exhibit P1 order dated 31.01.2007 informed the<\/p>\n
petitioner that the University has recommended the course to the AICTE<\/p>\n
and the Government of Kerala and that affiliation would be granted only<\/p>\n
after the sanction\/approval from the Government\/AICTE and after fulfilling<\/p>\n
all the conditions by the University with regard to the affiliation.<\/p>\n
W.P.(C) Nos. 30048 of 2008 and
\n33006 of 2008
\n                                     -:2:-<\/span><\/p>\n
        3. The stand taken by the University deferring the affiliation and that<\/p>\n
too, after taking steps for approval of the Government was challenged by<\/p>\n
the petitioner in W.P.(C) No.3827 of 2007, wherein Exhibit P2 interim order<\/p>\n
was passed directing the University to consider the question of affiliation<\/p>\n
without waiting for the views of the Government. In response to the above<\/p>\n
interim order, Exhibit P3 proceedings were issued by the University stating<\/p>\n
that the academic year 2006 – 2007 for which the affiliation was sought for,<\/p>\n
was already over and hence the University was not in a position to grant<\/p>\n
affiliation for the said period. Subsequently, the above writ petition was<\/p>\n
finally heard by this Court passing Exhibit P4 judgment, whereby the<\/p>\n
University was directed to consider the application already submitted by the<\/p>\n
petitioner for the subsequent year 2007 – 2008 as well, without insisting on<\/p>\n
the payment of affiliation fee once again. After considering the matter, the<\/p>\n
University passed Exhibit P5 proceedings holding that the Syndicate<\/p>\n
Standing Committee on Affiliation held on 09.08.2007 resolved to<\/p>\n
recommend to the Syndicate, not to consider the application for starting<\/p>\n
new colleges as the Committee suggested a feasibility study before starting<\/p>\n
new colleges\/courses.\n<\/p>\n
        4. However, it is the case of the petitioner that this was without any<\/p>\n
regard to Exhibit P6 proceedings dated 31.05.2006 whereby the Syndicate<\/p>\n
had already resolved to recommend to the Government to sanction a<\/p>\n
W.P.(C) Nos. 30048 of 2008 and
\n33006 of 2008
\n                                     -:3:-<\/span><\/p>\n
maximum of 4 courses in a college during 2006 and 2007 among the<\/p>\n
courses recommended. It is also discernible from Exhibit P6 itself, that out<\/p>\n
of the list of new unaided Arts and Science colleges seeking affiliation<\/p>\n
during 2006 – 2007, the name of the petitioner’s college is shown as serial<\/p>\n
number ‘1’, simultaneously showing the course proposed to be started, for<\/p>\n
which the affiliation was sought for. The petitioner has also remitted the<\/p>\n
requisite fee for application for renewal on 31.01.2008 as borne by Exhibit<\/p>\n
P7. Thereafter, the University issued Exhibit P8 order dated 12.06.2008,<\/p>\n
whereby two different stands are seen taken, as reflected under clause (ii)<\/p>\n
and (v) of the said order. Under clause (ii) it was decided to constitute<\/p>\n
Inspection Commissions in respect of the institutions proposed to be<\/p>\n
started ‘under the Government’, whereas in respect of other ‘unaided<\/p>\n
institutions’, it was mentioned under clause (v) that the application need<\/p>\n
not be considered for the four reasons stated there under; mainly referring<\/p>\n
to the existing manpower inadequacy to cope up with the additional work<\/p>\n
consequent on the sanctioning of the new unaided colleges.<\/p>\n
       5. Petitioner challenged Exhibit P8 proceedings before this Court by<\/p>\n
filing W.P.(C) No.24074 of 2008 highlighting the inconsistent and arbitrary<\/p>\n
stand of the University in dealing with the application submitted by the<\/p>\n
petitioner and also pointing out that as per the Government Circular dated<\/p>\n
25.07.2008 produced as Exhibit P9 in the present writ petition, in the case<\/p>\n
W.P.(C) Nos. 30048 of 2008 and
\n33006 of 2008
\n                                     -:4:-<\/span><\/p>\n
of Arts and Science colleges, the management could seek the approval<\/p>\n
from the concerned University itself.\n<\/p>\n
      6. In the meanwhile, the reasoning given by the University under<\/p>\n
clause (v) of Exhibit P8, order as made applicable to another institution<\/p>\n
was subjected to challenge by the said institution in W.P (C) No.18774 of<\/p>\n
2008. After considering the facts and figures, this Court as per Exhibit P11<\/p>\n
set aside the above reasoning, holding it as arbitrary and discriminatory<\/p>\n
and accordingly, the University was directed to grant affiliation to the<\/p>\n
courses for which the petitioner had filed application. The petitioner herein<\/p>\n
placed reliance on the above decision in W.P.(C) 18774 of 2008; based on<\/p>\n
which W.P.(C) 24074 of 2008 was disposed of, directing the University to<\/p>\n
consider the matter in the light of the verdict passed in W.P.(C) No. 18774<\/p>\n
of 2008 (simultaneously disposing the connected W.P.(C) No.26207 of<\/p>\n
2008 filed by the petitioner in W.P.(C) No.33006 of 2008).<\/p>\n
      7. It is brought on record that Exhibit P11 verdict passed by this<\/p>\n
Court was subjected to challenge from the part of the University by filing<\/p>\n
W.A.No.2122 of 2008 which led to Exhibit P13 verdict passed by the<\/p>\n
Division Bench in       W.P.(C) No.33006\/2008. However, based on the<\/p>\n
statement made from the part of the concerned college (as observed in<\/p>\n
paragraph 11 of the said verdict) conceding that, in so far as MBA course<\/p>\n
was concerned, the respondent college would not commence the same<\/p>\n
W.P.(C) Nos. 30048 of 2008 and
\n33006 of 2008
\n                                       -:5:-<\/span><\/p>\n
without obtaining the approval from AICTE, it was accordingly recorded<\/p>\n
and consequential directions were issued to the University to grant<\/p>\n
affiliation in respect of the courses except MBA which was only to be<\/p>\n
considered after the college obtained proper approval from the AICTE as<\/p>\n
made clear in the paragraph 14 of the said verdict.\n<\/p>\n
        8. Coming back to the case in hand, the University, pursuant to<\/p>\n
Exhibit P10 order considered the matter and passed Exhibit P13 order<\/p>\n
dated 24.09.2008 and Exhibit P11 dated the same day, in the connected<\/p>\n
case, holding that the Syndicate in the meeting held on 16.09.2008 had<\/p>\n
resolved not to grant affiliation to the new unaided Arts and Science college<\/p>\n
as the University had already decided not to grant affiliation to new<\/p>\n
colleges\/courses and not to increase number of seats in unaided colleges<\/p>\n
affiliated to the University during 2008 – 2009, which in turn have been<\/p>\n
subjected to challenge in the the above writ petition.<\/p>\n
        9. The respondent\/University has filed counter in both the cases<\/p>\n
highlighting the necessity to have the views of the Government and to<\/p>\n
abide by the same. It is stated therein that the Government, vide letter<\/p>\n
dated 26.08.2008, have communicated their views stating that affiliation<\/p>\n
shall be granted only to those colleges which signed an Agreement with the<\/p>\n
Government as stipulated in Exhibit R1 (a) in W.P. (C) 30048 of 2008.<\/p>\n
While stating that this was only one of the reasons which persuaded the<\/p>\n
W.P.(C) Nos. 30048 of 2008 and
\n33006 of 2008
\n                                      -:6:-<\/span><\/p>\n
University to take a decision declining to grant affiliation, it is further stated<\/p>\n
in the succeeding paragraph that it was also because of the lack of<\/p>\n
sufficient manpower in the University to cope up with the additional<\/p>\n
administration and other work if new colleges were to be granted affiliation.<\/p>\n
The second limb of the above reasoning having been set aside by this<\/p>\n
Court as per Ext.P12 judgment and confirmed by the Division Bench in<\/p>\n
Exhibit P13 verdict, the only impediment for the University was with regard<\/p>\n
to the want of affiliation\/approval from the Government, particularly, in view<\/p>\n
of the stipulation as to the necessity to execute an Agreement as stated in<\/p>\n
Ext. R1 (a) issued by the Government.\n<\/p>\n
       10. Subsequent to the filing of the counter affidavit, the petitioner in<\/p>\n
WP(C) No. 30048 of 2008 has filed a reply affidavit, also producing the<\/p>\n
Ext.P14 Government Order dated 7.11.2008 granting sanction for starting<\/p>\n
new Arts and Science colleges, subject to the condition specified therein<\/p>\n
and    Ext.P15 No Objection Certificate.      The learned counsel for the<\/p>\n
petitioner submits that the said proceedings were issued by the<\/p>\n
Government pursuant to the Agreement executed by the petitioner as<\/p>\n
stipulated by the Government in Ext. R1 (a). It is accordingly submitted that<\/p>\n
the sole hurdle placed on the way of the petitioner also got removed and<\/p>\n
hence that there is no rhyme or reason for the University to reject or refuse<\/p>\n
to consider application for grant of affiliation any further. The learned<\/p>\n
W.P.(C) Nos. 30048 of 2008 and
\n33006 of 2008
\n                                       -:7:-<\/span><\/p>\n
counsel for the petitioner also submits that the petitioner in WP (C )No.<\/p>\n
33006 of 2008 also proposes to submit similar Undertaking and Agreement<\/p>\n
as stipulated in Ext.R1(a) and that necessary proceedings in this regard<\/p>\n
would be submitted within no time and on such an event, the matter is<\/p>\n
liable to be considered by the concerned respondent.<\/p>\n
        11. The learned standing counsel appearing for the University<\/p>\n
submits that the matter requires to be examined in a wider magnitude and<\/p>\n
the credentials of the petitioner as to the availability of necessary<\/p>\n
infrastructure are to be ascertained and confirmed; the earlier inspection<\/p>\n
having been conducted way back in 2006. Learned counsel for the<\/p>\n
petitioner referring to Ext.P12 report of the Committee constituted by the<\/p>\n
University in this regard submits that the Committee engaged by the<\/p>\n
University had inspected the entire infrastructure and it was only after<\/p>\n
recording satisfaction, that the committee had recommended for granting<\/p>\n
affiliation. It is pointed out that with regard to the case of the petitioner in<\/p>\n
WP(C) No. 33006 of 2008 that even the University does not have any such<\/p>\n
case regarding the infrastructure, which in fact is conceded by the<\/p>\n
University as well. Learned counsel for the University referring to the<\/p>\n
contents of Ext.P12 proceedings of the Committee, who conducted the<\/p>\n
inspection, submits that the recommendation was made by the University<\/p>\n
only on the basis of offer\/undertaking to provide the necessary<\/p>\n
W.P.(C) Nos. 30048 of 2008 and
\n33006 of 2008
\n                                     -:8:-<\/span><\/p>\n
infrastructure and not after satisfying the available infrastructure as on the<\/p>\n
date of inspection. Paragraph 9 of Chapter 23 of the M.G. University First<\/p>\n
Statutes 1997 dealing with the grant of affiliation shows that the inspection<\/p>\n
and satisfaction are with regard to the availability of ownership of the<\/p>\n
land\/building, if any, the assets of the management, constitution of the<\/p>\n
registered body and such other incidental aspects. Even otherwise, the<\/p>\n
necessity to provide allocation of Teaching Staff and such other similar<\/p>\n
aspects would come into consideration only after obtaining necessary<\/p>\n
affiliation and it cannot be presumed that such Staff ought to have been<\/p>\n
appointed prior to granting affiliation of the University. In any view of the<\/p>\n
matter, the University is having sufficient power to see that the conditions<\/p>\n
imposed while granting the affiliation are complied with by the Institution<\/p>\n
and empowered to take appropriate steps even to cancel or suspend the<\/p>\n
affiliation, in case any non compliance is reported; which is more so in view<\/p>\n
of the stipulation as contained under the paragraphs 1912 and 1914 of the<\/p>\n
said Statutes.\n<\/p>\n
        12. The learned standing counsel for the University also seeks to<\/p>\n
place reliance on paragraph 1 under Chapter 23 of the above Statutes<\/p>\n
stating that the application submitted by the petitioners cannot be deemed<\/p>\n
as valid application, as it can only be regarded as ‘out of time’, as on date,<\/p>\n
the same having been submitted for the year 2006-2007. It is also pointed<\/p>\n
W.P.(C) Nos. 30048 of 2008 and
\n33006 of 2008
\n                                      -:9:-<\/span><\/p>\n
out that the maximum life period which can be given is only for two years.<\/p>\n
In both the cases, applications for renewal have been submitted and<\/p>\n
necessary renewal fees have already been remitted. Further, there is a<\/p>\n
specific observation made by this Court while passing Ext.P10 judgment,<\/p>\n
that the application submitted by the petitioner shall be considered with<\/p>\n
respect to the subsequent years, taking note of the sequence of the events.<\/p>\n
This being the position, the submission made from the part of the<\/p>\n
University with regard to the date of application and also as to the doubted<\/p>\n
absence of the infrastructure is without any pith or substance.<\/p>\n
       13. In view of the above discussion, it is very much relevant to note<\/p>\n
that the petitioner in WP(C) No. 30048 of 2008 has already complied with<\/p>\n
all the requisite steps for entertaining the application for affiliation including<\/p>\n
execution of necessary agreement as contemplated under Ext.R1(a)<\/p>\n
issued by the Government; as evident from Ext.P14 sanction and Ext.P15<\/p>\n
No Objection Certificate given by the Government. However, the consistent<\/p>\n
stand of the University (though proved inconsistent subsequently) as<\/p>\n
revealed from Ext.P1 was that, affiliation would be granted only after<\/p>\n
getting approval from the Government. Since the said requirement has<\/p>\n
already been satisfied, there is no point in delaying the affiliation to be<\/p>\n
given to the petitioner under any circumstances.\n<\/p>\n
W.P.(C) Nos. 30048 of 2008 and
\n33006 of 2008
\n                                       -:10:-<\/span><\/p>\n
        14. In the above circumstances, the respondents are directed to<\/p>\n
grant of affiliation to the petitioner in WP(C) No. 30048 of 2008 of course<\/p>\n
subject to the conditions to be stipulated by the University. This exercise<\/p>\n
shall be pursued and finalised within a period of two months from the date<\/p>\n
of receipt of copy of this judgment.\n<\/p>\n
        15. With regard to the petitioner in WP(C) No. 33006 of 2008, as<\/p>\n
already observed, the petitioner would execute and submit necessary<\/p>\n
Agreement as stipulated in Ext.R1(a) produced by the University and as<\/p>\n
agreed during the course of Hearing forthwith and on such an event, the<\/p>\n
matter shall be considered in similar terms by the University as directed in<\/p>\n
the connected case and necessary orders shall be passed granting<\/p>\n
affiliation for the year 2009 – 2010 within the period as stated as above.<\/p>\n
        Both the writ petitions are allowed accordingly. No costs.<\/p>\n
                             P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE<\/p>\n
kmd.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Kerala High Court The Christian Educational Trust vs M.G. University on 7 April, 2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM WP(C).No. 30048 of 2008(B) 1. THE CHRISTIAN EDUCATIONAL TRUST, … Petitioner Vs 1. M.G. UNIVERSITY, KOTTAYAM, … Respondent 2. THE VICE CHANCELLOR, For Petitioner :SRI.GEORGE POONTHOTTAM For Respondent : No Appearance The Hon’ble […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-28059","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-kerala-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nThe Christian Educational Trust vs M.G. University on 7 April, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-christian-educational-trust-vs-m-g-university-on-7-april-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"The Christian Educational Trust vs M.G. University on 7 April, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-christian-educational-trust-vs-m-g-university-on-7-april-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2009-04-06T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2017-11-03T16:08:56+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"12 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-christian-educational-trust-vs-m-g-university-on-7-april-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-christian-educational-trust-vs-m-g-university-on-7-april-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"The Christian Educational Trust vs M.G. University on 7 April, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-04-06T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-11-03T16:08:56+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-christian-educational-trust-vs-m-g-university-on-7-april-2009\"},\"wordCount\":2322,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Kerala High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-christian-educational-trust-vs-m-g-university-on-7-april-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-christian-educational-trust-vs-m-g-university-on-7-april-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-christian-educational-trust-vs-m-g-university-on-7-april-2009\",\"name\":\"The Christian Educational Trust vs M.G. University on 7 April, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-04-06T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2017-11-03T16:08:56+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-christian-educational-trust-vs-m-g-university-on-7-april-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-christian-educational-trust-vs-m-g-university-on-7-april-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-christian-educational-trust-vs-m-g-university-on-7-april-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"The Christian Educational Trust vs M.G. University on 7 April, 2009\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"The Christian Educational Trust vs M.G. University on 7 April, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-christian-educational-trust-vs-m-g-university-on-7-april-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"The Christian Educational Trust vs M.G. University on 7 April, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-christian-educational-trust-vs-m-g-university-on-7-april-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-04-06T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2017-11-03T16:08:56+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"12 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-christian-educational-trust-vs-m-g-university-on-7-april-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-christian-educational-trust-vs-m-g-university-on-7-april-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"The Christian Educational Trust vs M.G. University on 7 April, 2009","datePublished":"2009-04-06T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-11-03T16:08:56+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-christian-educational-trust-vs-m-g-university-on-7-april-2009"},"wordCount":2322,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Kerala High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-christian-educational-trust-vs-m-g-university-on-7-april-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-christian-educational-trust-vs-m-g-university-on-7-april-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-christian-educational-trust-vs-m-g-university-on-7-april-2009","name":"The Christian Educational Trust vs M.G. University on 7 April, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-04-06T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2017-11-03T16:08:56+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-christian-educational-trust-vs-m-g-university-on-7-april-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-christian-educational-trust-vs-m-g-university-on-7-april-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-christian-educational-trust-vs-m-g-university-on-7-april-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"The Christian Educational Trust vs M.G. University on 7 April, 2009"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/28059","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=28059"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/28059\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=28059"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=28059"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=28059"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}