Kerala High Court
Dhanya Babu.V vs University Of Calicut on 27 November, 2013
Author: A.M.Shaffique
Bench: A.M.Shaffique
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE
FRIDAY,THE 19TH DAY OF AUGUST 2016/28TH SRAVANA, 1938
WP(C).No. 25511 of 2015 (L)
----------------------------
PETITIONER :
----------------------
DHANYA BABU.V., D/O.BABU V.S, AGED 30 YEARS,
RESIDING AT DHANYASREE, VADAKETHARAYIL,
RAMAVARMAPURAM.P.O., THRISSUR-680 631.
BY ADVS.SRI.K.T.SHYAMKUMAR
SRI.HARISH R. MENON
RESPONDENT(S):
---------------------------
1. UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT,
CALICUT UNIVERSITY.P.O.,THEJIPALAM,
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS
REGISTRAR. PIN-673 635.
2. THE REGISTRAR, UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT,
CALICUT UNIVERSITY.P.O., THANJIPALAM,
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. PIN-673 635.
3. STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.PIN-695 001.
4. INDIRA GANDHI NATIONAL OPEN UNIVERSITY,
MAIDAN GARHI VILLAGE, CHATARPUR,
NEW DELHI-110 062. REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR.
R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI.SANTHOSH MATHEW,SC,
R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. LILLY.K.T.
R4 BY ADV. SRI.MOHANAKANNAN K., SC,
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON 19-08-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
sts
WP(C).No. 25511 of 2015 (L)
------------------------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
----------------------------------------
P1- TRUE COPY OF THE DEGREE CERTIFICATE OF B.SC PHYSICS ISSUED BY THE
1ST RESPONDENT UNIVERSITY.
P2- TRUE COPY OF THE MBA DEGREE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE 1ST
RESPONDENT UNIVERSITY.
P3- TRUE COPY OF THE MASTERS DEGREE CERTIFICATE IN M.COM ISSUED BY
IGNOU.
P4- TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR GRANT OF EQUIVALENCY
CERTIFICATE SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 27.11.2013.
P5- TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 3.12.2013 ISSUED BY THE 1ST
RESPONDENT.
P6- TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 14.12.2013 SUBMITTED BY THE
PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
P7- TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 23.4.2014 ISSUED BY THE 1ST
RESPONDENT UNIVERSITY.
P8- TRUE COPY OF THE LIST OF COURSES RECOGNIZED BY THE 1ST
RESPONDENT UNIVERSITY.
P9- TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 14.9.2000 ISSUED BY THE PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT TO THE DIFFERENT UNIVERSITIES IN
KERALA.
P10- TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 04.11.2014 IN W.P[C]NO.25172/2014.
P11- TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 24.04.2015 ISSUED BY THE FIRST
RESPONDENT.
P12- TRUE COPY OF THE AMENDMENT BROUGHT IN BY GAZETTE NOTIFICATION
DATED 8.4.2014.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS
-----------------------------------------
R4(A)- TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE M.COM. PROGRAMME GUIDE
R4(B)- TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION ISSUED BY THE UGC DATED 17/7/2014
/TRUE COPY/
sts P.A.TO JUDGE
A.M.SHAFFIQUE, J.
---------------------------------
W.P (C) No. 25511 of 2015
---------------------------------
Dated this the 19th day of August, 2016
J U D G M E N T
Petitioner challenges Exhibit P11 by which the University of Calicut had denied the request of the petitioner for equivalency in respect of the M.Com degree obtained by her from Indira Gandhi National Open University (for short 'IGNOU'). The equivalency had been denied on the ground that as per the regulations for admission of M.Com of Calicut University, the candidate who has passed B.Com or BBA (earlier BBS) Degree of University of Calicut or B.Com, BBA or BBM or BBS of any other University or Institute in any State, recognised by UGC or AICTE with minimum 45% marks alone are eligible for admission. In respect of the petitioner, she had only B.Sc Physics as Degree qualification, by which she had obtained M.Com Masters Degree from IGNOU. The University had not considered the request for equivalency in the proper perspective. Reference is made by the petitioner to Exhibit P7 by which it is stated that in the case of courses conducted by IGNOU, all degrees shall be recognized as equivalent to the degrees of the University and eligibility is not a criteria. Reference is also made to Exhibit P8 which relates to the W.P (C) No. 25511 of 2015 2 recognition of courses of other Universities by Calicut. There also, according to the petitioner, eligibility is not a criteria. It is submitted that as per UGC guidelines, the basic qualification for admission to M.Com course is only Graduate Degree irrespective of the subject in which the candidate has the Degree and when IGNOU had granted M.Com degree on the basis of UGC guidelines, the University of Calicut cannot insist that the basic qualification should be either B.Com or BBA. It is also contended that the petitioner has the Masters Degree in Business Administration (MBA) which also ought to have been considered by the Academic Council before rejecting the request for equivalency. It is contended that on account of the University not granting equivalency certificate, petitioner is unable to obtain any advantage of having M.Com Degree in any of the Colleges coming under the University of Calicut.
2. Statement is filed on behalf of respondents 1 and 2 inter alia stating that as per Exhibit P1 it is clearly stated that while recognizing courses of other Universities, the duration, nomenclature, discipline and eligibility criteria (which includes admission criteria) should be same as that of corresponding courses of the Calicut University. In that view of the matter, W.P (C) No. 25511 of 2015 3 the Academic Council had considered the issue and had decided not to grant equivalency as far as the petitioner is concerned since the petitioner's basic degree for admission to M.Com is B.Sc Physics, which is not a recognised graduate degree for admission to M.Com in Calicut University. Therefore, it is submitted that the petitioner cannot make any claim for equivalency.
3. Counter affidavit is also filed by the fourth respondent wherein references has been made to Exhibit R4(b), which is the qualification prescribed by UGC. Serial No.33 relates to M.Com and the entry qualification is stated as "Bachelor's". It is therefore contended that as far as IGNOU is concerned, Bachelor's Degree is the minimum qualification for M.Com.
4. Having regard to the factual situation involved in the case, the question that falls for consideration is whether Exhibit P11 order can be interfered with by this Court.
5. The specific contention urged by the petitioner alleging illegality in Exhibit P11 is with reference to Exhibit P7. Exhibit P7 is an order dated 23.04.2014 wherein the University had approved the report of the committee constituted for framing guidelines and norms for Recognition/Equivalency of W.P (C) No. 25511 of 2015 4 courses of other State and Central Universities including IGNOU. Clause I (as modified) & II are relevant, which reads as under:
"I. All Regular degrees of Universities or Deemed to be Universities (IITs, IISc, NIT, ISER, NISER, NIST etc.) enacted by an act of the State Legislative Assembly or Parliament can be equated with the corresponding degree of this University provided that
(a) those courses/programmes must be of the same duration of the courses/programmes of this University, (b) must be of the same nomenclature in the same discipline and (c) must have same eligibility criteria. The Equivalency Certificates can be issued for those courses for both higher studies and employment. The section concerned may issue Equivalency Certificates after examining the genuineness.
II. In the case of courses of IGNOU, in addition to the clause-1, all degrees shall be recognised as equivalent to the degrees of this University, for both higher studies and employment, provided that the normal duration, discipline, nomenclature should be the same of those courses/programmes offered by this University."
6. Though it is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the basic qualification for admission to the course is very much mentioned in Clause I, as far as Clauses W.P (C) No. 25511 of 2015 5 of IGNOU are concerned, it is clearly indicated that all degree shall be recognised as equivalent to the degrees of Calicut University. But, Clause II indicates that the said provision is made "in addition to clause-1". Therefore, it cannot be stated that the University had wrongly treated the eligibility criteria as also the factor to be taken note of for granting equivalency.
7. Though the learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon Exhibit P9, an order issued by the Government on 14.09.2000 requesting the Universities to act in accordance with the directions issued by the Association of Indian Universities and the Union Government from Ministry of Human Resource Development in the matter relating to recognition of degrees/diploma of IGNOU, I am of the view that since University had already considered the issue and had come with Exhibit P7, there is no further requirement to refer to Exhibit P9. Further, Exhibit P8 has not made any changes with reference to the guidelines referred in Exhibit P7. In the said circumstances, I do not find any error on the part of the University in taking a decision in terms of Exhibit P11.
8. However, the contention urged by the petitioner is that her MBA degree had not been taken into consideration, W.P (C) No. 25511 of 2015 6 which is a higher degree than that of BBA. In fact, there is no material in Exhibit P11 to indicate that her MBA degree had been taken note of by the Academic Council while evaluating the grant of equivalency. Taking into consideration the factual issues involved in the matter, it would only be appropriate for the Academic Council to reconsider the matter, taking into account the MBA degree obtained by the petitioner as well before proceeding further. In the said circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of as under:
The respondent University shall consider the claim for equivalency of the petitioner as provided under Exhibit P6 with reference to the MBA degree which she had obtained and a decision in that regard shall be taken within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
A.M.SHAFFIQUE JUDGE DMR/-