TMI Blog1989 (11) TMI 328X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The Adhiyamaan Educational and Research Institution. The petitioner applied to the Government of Tamil Nadu for permission to start a new self-financing private Engineering College without involving am financial commitment on the part of the Government. As a matter of policy, the Government in their G. O. Ms. No. 429. Education. Science and Technology Department, dated 17-4-1984 had permitted private managements to start new Engineering Colleges under the self-financing scheme without any financial commitment to the Government subject to the fulfilment of certain conditions. Pursuant to the policy decision, the Government granted permission to the writ petitioner to start a private Engineering College in the name and style of Adhiyaman College of Engineering, Hosur, Dharmapuri District, by G. O. Ms. No. 865, Education, Department, dated 9-6-1987. The permission was to start the College with effect from 1987-88. The permission was granted to offer three degree courses with the intake of 180 students per year (60 students in each course) in the following subjects :-- (a) Mechanical Engineering. (b) Electronics and Communication Engineering. (c) Computer Science and Engineeri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e recommendations of the earlier commission and subject to usual conditions of affiliation already laid down in the letter dated 21-11-1987. The petitioner applied on 24-11-1988 for affiliation for Third Year B. E. Degree Course for the academic year 1989-90 and continuation of affiliation for First Year and Second Year B. E. Degree Courses. In March, 1989, a Committee appointed by the Director of Technical Education to inspect the College submitted a report which was forwarded to the petitioner with a direction to lake steps to create necessary infrastructural facilities. The petitioner sent a reply informing the Director of the progress made in regard to the provision of necessary infrastructural facilities. 5. In the meanwhile, on 27-3-1989 the Government appointed a High Power Committee by G. -O. Ms. No. 350, Education Department, to visit the self-financing Engineering Colleges and make an assessment of their functioning. The High Power Committee submitted a report to the effect that the conditions imposed by the Government at the time of grant of permission and the conditions imposed by the University while granting affiliation had not been fulfilled by the petitioner. Aft ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... provisional affiliation to the petitioner. In both the writ petitions, the State of Tamil Nadu represented by the Special Commissioner and Secretary to Government, Education Department, the Director of Technical Education, Madras and the University of Madras were made respondents. Subsequently, the petitioner filed W. M. P. 15083 of 1989 for impleading the Union of India, represented by Secretary to Government, Ministry of Human Resources Development, Department of Education, New Delhi and the All India Council for Technical Education as respondents 4 and 5. The application for impleading respondents 4 and 5 was ordered. While the writ petitions were pending, the learned single Judge appointed a Committee to inspect the College and make a report as to whether the deficiencies pointed out by the Government and the University had been rectified. The High Court Committee submitted a report that the petitioner had not even provided the infrastructural facilities for conducting the different Engineering Courses. 8. By a common judgment dated 6-10-1989, Bakthavatsalam, J. allowed W. P. No. 10222 of 1989 and dismissed W. P. No. 10223 of 1989. The learned Judge held that after the passi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ttained a new dimension in the appellate stage by the grant of permission to some of the students of the college numbering about 59 to intervene in the writ appeal filed by the petitioner on the ground that no orders should be passed in the appeal without hearing them. Thus, we had to hear counsel for five parties, in the appeals. 11. Mr. K. K. Venugopal, senior counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the learned Judge having found rightly against the power of the University to give approval or disapproval to any technical institution, erred in upholding the resolutions passed by the Syndicate which were based only upon the report of the High Power Committee appointed by the Slate Government, when the appointment of the Committee was itself found to be illegal and unconstitutional. He made detailed submissions in support of the finding of the learned Judge that after the Central Act came into force, neither the Slate Government nor the University was entitled to give approval or disapproval to any technical institution. He submitted that Statute 44(A) could not be invoked in this case as the University was not entitled to impose such conditions for grant of affiliati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he University as evident from the available records. 5) It is not open to a public authority to support its orders on grounds not found in the orders themselves. In this case, the communication of the University and the resolutions passed by the Syndicate as extracted in the communications, did not refer to breach of condition No. 18 as the ground for rejection of the application made by the petitioner for continuation of affiliation. It is not open to the University to urge before the Court that the decision taken by the Syndicate could be supported on grounds other than those found in the resolutions themselves. On the basis of the above contentions, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the judgment of the learned Judge in so far as it is against the petitioner should be set aside and a writ should be issued against the University and prayed for by the petitioner. Learned counsel also submitted that till the All India Council for Technical Education constituted under the Central Act decides the issue, the petitioner should be allowed to continue the College and the directions issued by the learned Judge for transfer of students to other colleges should be set a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... chnical Education which could decide whether the affiliation could be withdrawn or whether the affiliation came to an end by sheer efflux of time. But, the learned Attorney General, however, admitted that it would be open to the University to reject the application for continuation of affiliation on grounds which would not be covered by the expression Coordination and Determination of Standards , but it would be a matter for this Court to decide whether the particular ground relied on by the University falls outside the purview of the expression Co-ordination and Determination of Standards . The learned Attorney General also supported the contention of the petitioner's counsel that in the present case, it is not open to the University to rely upon the non-fulfilment of condition No. 18 as it is not a ground mentioned in the resolutions passed by the Syndicate. 13. The Advocate General for the state appeared for the Government and the Director of Technical Education and contended that the Slate Government is entitled to impose such conditions as would be for the betterment of the standards which may be prescribed by the All India Council for Technical Education. According t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ary infrastructural facilities were not provided by the petitioner. According to him, the directions given by the learned single Judge that the Director of Technical Education to transfer the students to some other Colleges where there are infrastructural facilities for the students to continue their studies in a better atmosphere should be maintained irrespective of the view we take on the question of law which has arisen for consideration in this case. Learned counsel submitted the following four reasons in support of his plea :-- i) It is unsafe to allow the students to continue in the petitioner's College where there are no infrastructural facilities. ii) As on date, there is no affiliation of the College to the University and it is still a subject matter of litigation. iii) The Government as well as the University are prepared to accommodate the students in their Colleges which have all the necessary infrastructural facilities. iv) The College is not functioning from July 1989. Hence, he submitted that there is absolutely no justification for acceding to the request of the petitioner's counsel to permit the College to continue until the question of approval ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of a State, or, as the case may be, the existing law, shall prevail and the law made by the Legislature of the Slate shall be void to the extent of the repugnancy. The exception is provided in cl. (2), whereby a law made by the Legislature of a State with respect to one of the matters enumerated in the Concurrent List shall prevail in cases of repugnancy, if the law has been reserved for the consideration of the President and had received his assent. The proviso to cl. (2) enables Parliament to enact at any time any law with respect to the same matter including a law adding to, amending, varying or repealing the law so made by the Legislature of the State. It can be said that the first part of cl. (1) of Art. 254 of the Constitution refers to a case of a Parliamentary law with reference to a matter in List I and the law of a State Legislature with reference to a matter in List II, and the second part of cl. (1) of the Article refers to matters falling under the Concurrent List. 18. Art. 372 of the Constitution provides that notwithstanding the repealing of the enactments referred to in Art. 395, all the laws in force in the territory of India immediately before the commencement ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hether the U.P. Sugarcane (Regulation of Supply and Purchase) Act (24 of 1953) was ultra vires of the State Legislature of Uttar Pradesh. The Court found on a comparison of the terms of U.F. Sugar Factories Control Act (1 of 1938) with those of the impugned Act that the latter merely confined itself to the regulation of the supply and purchase of sugarcane required for use in sugar factories and did not concern itself at all with the controlling or licencing the sugar factories, with the production or manufacture of sugar or with the trade and commerce in, and the production, supply and distribution of sugar. It was held that there was no question whatever of the State Act trenching upon the jurisdiction of the Centre in regard to sugar industry which was a controlled industry within Entry 52 of List I. In the course of the judgment, the Supreme Court elucidated the exact connotation of the term repugnancy . It was observed - Repugnancy falls to be considered when the law made by Parliament and the law made by the State Legislature occupy the same field because, if both these pieces of legislation deal with separate and distinct matters though of a cognate and allied character ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r impliedly evinced its intention to cover the whole field, then a subordinate law in the same field is repugnant and therefore inoperative. Whether and to what extent in a given case, the dominant law evinces such an intention must necessarily depend on the language of the particular law . 23. It is thus made clear that for the purpose of repugnancy, a direct conflict between the two provisions is not necessary. It is sufficient that there are two parallel laws on the same subject and even if it is possible to obey both of them, the law of the State Legislature is nullified in the presence of the Union law. 24. A similar question arose in Hingir Rampur Coal Co. v. State of Orissa [1961]2SCR537 . The Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court expounded the law thus :-- (23). The next question which arises is, even if the cess is fee and as such may be relatable to Entries 23 and 66 in List II its validity is still open to challenge because the legislative competence of the State Legislature under Entry 23 is subject to the provisions of List I with respect to regulation and development under the control of the Union; and that takes us to Entry 54 on List I. This Entry reads ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rdance with the rules made under this Act. S. 5 empowers the Central Government to make rules by notification for regulating the grant of such leases in respect of any mineral or in any area. Ss. 4 and 5 thus purport to prescribe necessary conditions in accordance with which mining lease have to be executed. This part of the Act has no relevance to our present purpose. S. 6 of the Act, however, empowers the Central Government to make rules by notification in the official gazette for the conservation and development of minerals. S. 6(2) lays down several matters in respect of which rules can be framed by the Central Government. This power is, however, without prejudice to the generality of powers conferred on the Central Government by S. 6(1). Amongst the matters covered by S. 6(2) is the levy and collection of royalties, fees, or taxes in respect of minerals mines, quarries, excavated or collected. It is true that no rules have in fact been framed by the Central Government in regard to the levy and collection of any fees; but in our opinion, that would not make any difference. If it is held that this Act contains the declaration referred to in Entry 23 there would be no difficulty ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ity, and other institutions declared by Parliament by Laws to be an institution of national importance is thereby granted exclusively to Parliament. Item 64 invests the Parliament with power to legislate in respect of institutions for scientific or technical education financed by the Government of India wholly or in part and declared by Parliament, by law, to be institutions of national importance . Item 65 vests in the Parliament power to legislate for Union agencies and institutions for (a) professional, vocational or technical training, including the training of police officers; or (b) the promotion of special studies or research; or (c) scientific or technical assistance in the investigation or detention of crime . By item 66 power is entrusted to Parliament to legislate on co-ordination and determination of standards in institutions for higher education or research and scientific and technical institutions. Item 25 of the concurrent List confers power upon the Union Parliament and the State Legislature to enact legislation with respect to vocational and technical training of labour . It is manifest that the extensive power vested in the Provincial Legislatures to legislate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h they are situate, even though the State Legislature would have no other power in respect of those institutions. Item 11 of List II and Item 66 of List I must be harmoniously construed. The two entries undoubtedly overlap; but to the extent of over-lapping, the power conferred by item 66 List I must prevail over the power of the State under item 11 of List II. It is manifest that the excluded heads deal primarily with education in institutions of national or special importance and institutions of higher education including research, sciences technology and vocational training of labour. The power to legislate in respect of Primary or secondary education is exclusively vested in the States by Item No. II of List II, and power to legislate on medium of instruction in institutions of primary or secondary education must therefore rest with the State Legislatures. Power to legislate in respect of medium of instruction is, however, not a distinct legislative head; it resides with the State legislatures in which the power to legislate on education is vested, unless it is taken away by necessary intendment to the contrary. Under items 63 to 65 the power to legislate in respect of medium o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... falling within Entry 64 of List I would have to be judged having regard to whether it impinges on the field reserved for the Union under Entry 66. In other words, the validity of State legislation would depend upon whether it prejudicially affects co-ordination and determination of standards, but not upon the existence of some definite Union legislation directed to achieve that purpose. If there be Union legislation in respect of co-ordination and determination of standards, that would have paramountcy over the State law by virtue of the first part of Art. 254(1); even if that power be not exercised by the Union Parliament the relevant legislative entries being in the exclusive lists, a State law trenching upon the Union field would still be invalid. 26. The above case has more relevance to the present case than the other decisions of the Supreme Court as it relates to Entry 66 in List I and Entry II in List II before the amendment of the Constitution in 1976. 27. In State of Orissa v. M. A. Tulloch and Co. [1964]4SCR461 , another Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court dealt with Entry 54 of List I and Entry 23 in List II. The question related to the validity of Orissa Mini ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... both the legislations occupy the same field with respect to one of the matters enumerated in the Concurrent List, and there is direct conflict between the two laws. It is only when both these requirements are fulfilled that the State law will, to the extent of repugnancy become void. Art. 254(1) has not application to cases of repugnancy due to overlapping found between List II On the one hand and List I and List III on the other. If such overlapping exists in any particular case, the State law will be ultra vires because of the non obstante clause in Art. 246(1) read with the opening words subject to in Art. 246(3). In such a case, the State law will fail not because of repugnance to the Union law but due to want of legislative competence. It is no doubt true that the expression a law made by Parliament which Parliament is competent to enact in Art. 254(1) is susceptible of a construction that repugnance between a State law and a law made by Parliament may take place outside the concurrent sphere because Parliament is competent to enact law with regard to subjects included in List III as well as List I . But if Art. 254(1) is read as a whole, it will be seen that it is expre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The intention of the legislature has to be gathered by reading the statute as a whole. That is a rule which is now firmly established for the purpose of construction of statutes. The High Court appears to have gone on a tangent. The High Court would not have fallen into an error if it had perused the U.G.C. Act as a whole and compared it with the Commissionerate Act or vice versa. 24. In Prem Chand Jain v. R. K. Chhabra 1984CriLJ668 this court has held that the U.G.C. Act falls under entry 66 of List I. It is then unthinkable as to how the State could pass a parallel enactment under entry 25 of List III, unless it encroaches entry 66 of List I. Such an encroachment is patent and obvious. The Commissionerate Act is beyond the legislative competence of the State Legislature and is hereby declared void and inoperative. 30. Bearing the above principles in mind, we shall look into the provisions of Central Act 52 of 1987 and compare the same with the provisions of Madras University Act. Undoubtedly, the Central Act is one that falls within Entry 66 of the Union List. As seen from the Statement of Objects and Reasons, the Act has been brought into existence to provide statutory p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f any department or departments of technical institution or University to be made in such manner as may be prescribed and by such person or persons as it may direct for the purpose of ascertaining the financial needs of technical institution or a University of its standards of teaching, examination and research. It is not necessary to refer to the other provisions of the Act, Suffice it to point out that the Act falls squarely within the Legislative Head Coordination and determination of Standards in institutions for higher education or research and scientific and technical institutions . (Entry 66 of List (I). 31. Turning to the Madras University Act, it is a pre-constitution enactment, having been passed in 1923. It is one of those Acts which continued in force by virtue of Art. 322 of the Constitution of India. It can, therefore, be altered, repealed or amended by a competent legislature or other competent authority. It is the contention of the learned Attorney General that the Central Act 52 of 1987 having been passed by a Competent Legislature, viz., the Parliament, is the law which has altered or amended the Madras University Act. U/S. 16 of the Madras University Act, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... diplomas of the University and to withdraw such approval; 4. to prescribe after consultation with the Academic Council, the conditions for affiliating colleges to the University and to withdraw affiliation from colleges; and 5. to provide for the inspection of all colleges and hostels. 34. Thus, it is seen that the Madras University Act contains provisions which would relate to co-ordination and determination of standards in colleges including institutions for higher education or research and scientific and technical institutions. It goes without saying that the Madras University Act, 1923, is a parallel enactment to Central Act 52 of 1987 with reference to technical institutions. In view of the categorical pronouncements made by the Supreme Court, such of those provisions of the Madras University Act which will fall under the heading Co-ordination and determination of standards in institutions for higher education or research and scientific and technical institutions will be void and inoperative. The Parliament having been entitled exclusively to legislate on the subjects in List I, the Central Act will prevail over the provisions of the Madras University Act as well a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ions given by AH India Council for Technical Education, is without any force. The ratio of the judgments of the Supreme Court referred to earlier will apply with more force as regards the executive orders passed by the State Government. Long before the enactment of Central Act 52 of 1987, the All India Council for Technical Education was set up in 1945 by a Government resolution as a National Expert Body to advise the Central and the State Governments for ensuring the coordinated development of technical education in accordance with approved standards. The State Government could be said to have been functioning under the advice of the said Council till the Central Act 52 of 1987 was passed. In fact, during the course of arguments, the learned Advocate General submitted that the State Government was always implementing the directions given from time to time by the All India Council. Whatever may be the position before the enactment of the Central Act, on the coming into force of the Act, the State government's jurisdiction over the matters covered by the Act vanishes. What applies to a State Legislation will apply with more force to an executive order made by the State. 36. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oaching on the field covered by entry 66 of List I of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution. If so, it is not disputed that the State Government would be within its rights to prescribe qualifications for admission to colleges so long as its action does not contravene any other law. 37. The same test was applied in State of Andhra Pradesh v. L. Narendra Nath [1971]3SCR699 . The proposition was reiterated in Ambesh Kumar v. Principal, LLRM Medical College, Meerut [1987]1SCR661 . The relevant passages in the judgment read thus :-- In the instant case the number of seats for admission to various post-graduate courses both degree and diploma in Medical Colleges is limited and a large number of candidates undoubtedly apply for admission to these courses of study. In such circumstances the impugned order laying down the qualification for a candidate to be eligible for being considered for selection for admission to the said courses on the basis of the merit as specified by Regulations made under the Indian Medical Council Act cannot be said to be in conflict with the said Regulations or in any way repugnant to the said regulations. It does not in any way encroach upon the stand ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s given by the State Government subject to certain conditions, it is open to the State Government to cancel the same on the ground that the conditions were not fulfilled. Similarly, it is argued that the University having granted affiliation subject to certain conditions, is entitled to withdraw the affiliation on the ground that those conditions are not fulfilled. We have already referred to the relevant provisions of the Central Act. It does not make any distinction between institutions which had come into existence before the passing of the Act and those which are to be started thereafter. We have no doubt whatever that the Act applies to all technical institutions, whether they came to be before the passing of the Act or subsequent thereto. The learned Advocate General lays stress on Section 10(k) of the Act which provides for grant of approval for starting new technical institutions and for introduction of new courses or programmes in consultation with the agencies concerned. The said provision does not indicate in any manner that the powers conferred and the duties enjoined on the Council are confined to such new institutions and not the existing institutions. The language of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r XXVI of the Laws of the University deals with Affiliation and Approval of Colleges. Under Statute 18, Syndicate shall have the power after consultation with the Academic Council to affiliate any college as an Affiliated College or as an approved college within the University area. Statute 19 empowers the Syndicate to recommend to the Senate the withdrawal of suspension for a definite period of the affiliation or approval granted to a college. Statutes 37 to 42 prescribe the procedure for granting affiliation or approval. Under Statute 37, a college applying for affiliation or approval shall send a formal letter of application to the Registrar between the 1st July and 31st October proceeding the academic year in which the courses are proposed to be started and shall give full information in the letter on the matters set out in the statute, such a Constitution and personnel of the Managing Body, subjects and courses in which affiliation or approval is sought, accommodation, equipment, strength of the college, the number of students for whom provision has been made or is proposed to be made, qualifications, salaries and work of the teachers together with a time-table of work, hostel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the conditions are fulfilled, the Syndicate shall have the power at the end of the period, to confirm affiliation or approval. The confirmation of the affiliation of approval shall be reported to the Academic Council and the Senate. Statutes 46, expressly prohibits gram of affiliation or approval with retrospective effect. 43. While the procedure prescribed by the Statutes is unambiguous, the University of Madras has not been following it in practice and it can be said without any fear of contradiction that the Statutes are followed more in breach than in observance. There is no provision in the Statutes for granting affiliation before the conditions are fulfilled. The enabling provision in Statute 44. A. to the effect that affiliation or approval granted may be provisional, is invariably misused by the University by granting provisional affiliation or approval even when any one of the prescribed conditions is not fulfilled. For example the provisional affiliation granted in this case by the University to the writ petitioner is by a letter dated 21-11-1987 for the Academic year 1987-88. Reading Statutes 37 and 38 together, the application for affiliation for the Academic ye ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cants, whether they satisfied the requirements or not; but the grant is made with the direction that the conditions should be complied with by the applicants. By adopting the said practice, the University of Madras has been doing a great disservice to the cause of education as well as the society. The members of the public comprising parents and students are being misled by the grant of provisional affiliation by the University. It is also a matter for regret that the University has been simply winking at the commencement of colleges and courses by the aspirants for affiliation even before the actual provisional affiliation. Invariably, the applicants for affiliation commence the colleges immediately after sending the applications for affiliation. Even though the University is fully aware of this illegal practice of commencement of colleges and admitting students therein, it has not taken any steps to prevent the same. If the University has been strictly adhering to the procedure prescribed in Statutes 37 to 41, cases of this type would not have arisen. The University could also have prevented thereby the mushroom growth of private educational institutions by persons who commence s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... urse of study. It is very unfortunate that the University of Madras, which is the custodian of education in this State should forego the interests of the students in this manner. It is high time that the University puts an end to this illegal practice of granting provisional affiliation to educational institutions even without substantial compliance with the conditions prescribed therefor. 45. By virtue of the existing practice, the University has been holding out, so to say, that provisional affiliation would be granted for the asking of it and it would be continued until it is expressly withdrawn or cancelled. Based on the same, the petitioner as well as hundreds of institutions have obtained provisional affiliation without fulfilling the conditions prescribed therefore .But, it is not possible for the University to contend that the grant of provisional affiliation is itself bad and consequently therefore, institutions like that of the petitioner cannot seek continuance of the same or challenge the invocation of Statute 44.A of Chapter XXVI of the Laws of the University. The principles of doctrine of equitable estoppel will well apply to such cases including the present one. B ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rned Attorney-General to the ruling of a Division Bench of this Court in A. Vedachata Mudaliar v. Central Road Traffic Board, Madras AIR1948Mad454 . It was held in that case that the impugned order therein could not be supported as one passed in the exercise of powers conferred by Rule 149 of the Rules framed under the Motor Vehicles Act, as it did not appear on the face of the record that the Central Road Traffic Board was purporting to exercise a power conferred by the said Rule. The Bench observed thus :-- ....It does not appear on the face of the record that the Central Road Traffic Board was purporting to exercise a power conferred on it by R. 149. The order was both in form and substance an order allowing an appeal by the second respondent. It is well established that it is not a good return to a rule nisi for the issue of a writ of certiorari to state that the order is justified on facts not contained in the order. This Court cannot take notice of any fact which does not appear upon the face of the order (vide Halsbury, Hailsham Edition, Volume IX, page 889 and the King v. Liston, 101 ER 189). 48. Reliance is also placed on the dictum of the Supreme Court in Mohinder ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... orms and conditions or maintained the required standards, we cannot hold that the college is functioning illegally or unlawfully and direct the second respondent to transfer the students to other colleges. 50. Learned counsel for the students placed reliance on the following observations made by the Supreme Court in Rajendra Prasad Mathur v. Karnataka University [1986]2SCR912 . ....But, the question still remains whether we should allow the appellants to continue their studies in the respective Engineering Colleges in which they were admitted. It was strenuously pressed upon us on behalf of the appellants that under the orders initially of the learned Judge and thereafter of this Court they have been pursuing their course of study in the respective Engineering Colleges and their admissions should not now be disturbed because if they are now thrown out after a period of almost four years since their admission their whole future will be blighted. Now it is true that the appellants were not eligible for admission to the Engineering Degree Course and they had no legitimate claim to such admission. But it must be noted that the blame for their wrongful admission must lie more upo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... our fiat direct the University to disobey the statute to which it owes its existence and the regulations made by the University itself. We cannot imagine anything more destructive of the rule of law than a direction by the Court to disobey the law. According to him, if the students are allowed to continue in the petitioner college, it will tantamount to directing the University to disobey the provisions of the University Act and the Statutes made thereunder. 51. Neither of the rulings referred to above will apply to the facts of the present case. We have stated sufficiently to show that the blame in this case is not merely on the writ petitioner, but mostly on the University. The students cannot also plead complete innocence. They ought not to have joined the college, which according to their present version, docs not have the minimum infrastructural facilities. In any event, we cannot give directions to the Government or the University to transfer the students to some other college. 52. However, we make it clear that it will be open to any student to get a transfer certificate from the petitioner college and join any other college. If a student applies for transfer cert ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ns. The first petition is for deleting or modifying para 52 of the judgment of this Court in the appeal. The second one is for direction to the first two respondents to allot the 50% quota of students for the first year B.E. Course in the petitioner-Institution within three weeks. The third petition is for directions to respondents 1 to 3 to permit the students of the petitioner-Institution to appear in all ensuing B.E. Examination for the B.E. Degree course to be conducted in the petitioner-Institution. 57. In our judgment, we had taken the view that after the passing of the Central Act 52 of 1987, the jurisdiction to decide whether a particular Institution satisfied the norms and standards prescribed therefore by the All India Council for Technical Education rested with the All India Council, and neither the State Govt. nor the University had the power to decide the same. On that footing, we allowed the appeal, and quashed the resolution passed by the University refusing to grant affiliation to the appellant. We also affirmed the judgment of the learned single Judge quashing to show cause notice issued by the State Government. In the course of the judgment, we observed in para ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n had been raised by learned counsel for the petitioner that we should not look into the report or act upon it, for two reasons. The first submission is that the scope of the discretion to be exercised by us as per the order of the Supreme Court is very limited. According to him, we are bound to consider only the prayer of the appellant with regard to the direction given by us in the matter of issuing transfer certificates to the students. Learned counsel contends that the Supreme Court's direction is clear that it is only the prayer of the appellant which should be considered by this Bench. Learned counsel also cited a judgment of the Full Bench of this Court in the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, Madras, Board of Revenue, Madras v. Canara Industrial and Banking Syndicate Ltd., Madras AIR1969Mad1 and placed reliance on the observation that it would be erroneous principle of interpreting the judgment, to press into service the last few observations alone, divorced, from the earlier passages. The second submission is that under S. 11 of the Ail India Council for Technical Education Act, the views of the council shall be forwarded to the Institution concerned, and the opinio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der is passed by us only as a consequence to the observations already made. 62. As regards the objection raised by learned counsel for the petitioner that we shall not act upon the report until an opportunity is given to the petitioner by the council under S. 11 of the Act, we hold that for the limited purpose of considering the prayer, of the petitioner herein, we are entitled to look into the report which brings out the existing facts. This will not stand in the way of further proceedings by the council. It is crystal clear that the petitioner's Institution is nowhere near the norms and standards prescribed by the council. No other conclusion is possible in the face of the report submitted by the committee appointed by the council. Hence, we are of the view that the petitioner is not entitled to get any relief prayed for by him. 63. Apart from that, as the learned Advocate-General pointed out, the petitioner actually seeks to have to review of our judgment. He should have filed an application for review. But he has only filed a miscellaneous petition, paying a Court-fee of Rs. 2/- which is not the proper remedy. But, we are not dismissing the petition on that technical ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to have been given to the Sub-Collector, and an endorsement was made in the presence of Sub-Collector, by one Asai Thambi on behalf of the principal of the College. The endorsement reads as follows :-- We have received from the above students applications requesting for transfer certificate and we will issue the transfer certificate after consultation with the management at an early date. Below that, there is another endorsement by the Principal, which reads as follows :-- As discussed in the room of Assistant Collector today, the individual application does not contain adequate reason for leaving this college on personal, financial or for betterment of Education. It is stated in the affidavit that a detailed representation has been made subsequent to the endorsement giving the reasons for leaving the College. Whatever it may be, so long as there is no rule governing the issue of transfer certificates, the College can only insist upon payment of arrears of fees, if any, and cannot go into the validity of the reasons given by the students. A student is certainly entitled to leave the college as he chooses, it will not cause any financial prejudice to the institution. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
