Kerala High Court
University Of Calicut vs St.Joseph'S College (Autonomous) on 11 September, 2020
Author: Shaji. P. Chaly
Bench: S.Manikumar, Shaji P.Chaly
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.MANIKUMAR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY
FRIDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2020 / 20TH BHADRA, 1942
WA.No.2388 OF 2019
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 03.04.2019 IN WP(C) 38450/2018(E) OF HIGH
COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANTS/RESPONDENTS 1 & 2:
1 UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT,
REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, CALICUT UNIVERSITY.P.O.,
THENHIPALAM, MALAPPURAM-673 635.
2 VICE CHANCELLOR
UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT, CALICUT UNIVERSITY.P.O.,
THENHIPALAM, MALAPPURAM-673 635.
BY ADV. SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN, SC, CALICUT UNIVERSITY
RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER & 3RD RESPONDENT:
1 ST.JOSEPH'S COLLEGE (AUTONOMOUS),
DEVAGIRI, CALICUT-673 008, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER,
P.J.JOSEPH.
2 UNIVERSITY GRANTS COMMISSION (UGC),
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, BAHADUR SHAH ZAFAR MARG,
NEW DELHI-110 002.
R2 BY SRI.S.KRISHNAMOORTHY, CGC
R1 BY SRI. BABY ISAAC ILLIKKAL
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11.09.2020, ALONG
WITH W.A. NOS. 2336, 2389, 2558, 2450 of 2019 & 934 of 2020 THE
COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.A. No. 2388/2019 & batch :2:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.MANIKUMAR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY
FRIDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2020 / 20TH BHADRA, 1942
WA.No.2336 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 03.04.2019 IN WP(C) 29667/2018(G) OF HIGH
COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANTS/RESPONDENTS:
1 UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT
REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, CALICUT UNIVERSITY P.O.,
THENHIPALAM, MALAPPURAM-673 635.
2 VICE CHANCELLOR
UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT, CALICUT UNIVERSITY P.O.,
THENHIPALAM, MALAPPURAM-673 635.
BY ADV. SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN, SC, CALICUT UNIVERSITY
RESPONDENT/PETITIONER:
MANAGER,
ST.THOMAS COLLEGE (AUTONOMOUS), THRISSUR-680 001.
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11.09.2020,
ALONG WITH W.A. No. 2388/2019 & BATCH, THE COURT ON THE
SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.A. No. 2388/2019 & batch :3:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.MANIKUMAR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY
FRIDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2020 / 20TH BHADRA, 1942
WA.No.2389 OF 2019
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 03.04.2019 IN WP(C) 28511/2018(L) OF HIGH
COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANTS/RESPONDENTS:
1 UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT
REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, CALICUT UNIVERSITY P.O.,
THENHIPALAM, MALAPPURAM-673 635.
2 VICE CHANCELLOR
UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT, CALICUT UNIVERSITY P.O.,
THENHIPALAM, MALAPPURAM-673 635.
BY ADV. SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN, SC, CALICUT UNIVERSITY
RESPONDENT/PETITIONER:
MANAGER,
ST.JOSEPH'S COLLEGE (AUTONOMOUS), DEVAGIRI, CALICUT-
673 008.
SRI. BABY ISSAC ILLICKAL
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11.09.2020, ALONG
WITH W.A. No. 2388/2019 & BATCH, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.A. No. 2388/2019 & batch :4:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.MANIKUMAR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY
FRIDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2020 / 20TH BHADRA, 1942
WA.No.2450 OF 2019
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 20.06.2019 IN WP(C) 30545/2017(P) OF HIGH
COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANTS/RESPONDENTS 1 AND 2:
1 UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT
REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, CALICUT UNIVERSITY P.O,
THENHIPALAM, MALAPPURAM- 673 635.
2 VICE CHANCELLOR
UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT, CALICUT UNIVERSITY P.O,
THENHIPALAM, MALAPPURAM - 673 635.
BY ADV. SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN, SC, CALICUT UNIVERSITY
RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS AND 3RD RESPONDENT:
1 CHRIST COLLEGE
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER, IRINJALAKKUDA- 680 125.
2 PRINCIPAL
CHRIST COLLEGE, IRINJALAKKUDA- 680 125.
3 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT , GOVERNMENT OF KERALA,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 001.
R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI.BABY ISSAC ILLICAKAL (B/O)
R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER (B/O)
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11.09.2020,
ALONG WITH W.A. No. 2388/2019 & BATCH, THE COURT ON THE
SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.A. No. 2388/2019 & batch :5:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.MANIKUMAR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY
FRIDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2020 / 20TH BHADRA, 1942
WA.No.2558 OF 2019
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 03.04.2019 IN WP(C) 12830/2018(C) OF HIGH
COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANTS/RESPONDENTS:
1 UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT
REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, CALICUT UNIVERSITY P.O.
THENHIPALAM, MALAPPURAM 673 635.
2 VICE CHANCELLOR,
UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT,
CALICUT UNIVERSITY P.O. THENHIPALAM,
MALAPPURAM 673 635.
BY ADV. SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN, SC, CALICUT UNIVERSITY
RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS:
1 MANAGER, CHRIST COLLEGE
IRINJALAKUDA 680 125.
2 PRINCIPAL,
CHRIST COLLEGE, IRINJALAKUDA 680 125.
SRI. BABY ISSAC ILLIKKAL
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11.09.2020,
ALONG WITH W.A. No. 2388/2019 & BATCH, THE COURT ON THE
SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.A. No. 2388/2019 & batch :6:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.MANIKUMAR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY
FRIDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2020 / 20TH BHADRA, 1942
WA.No.934 OF 2020
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 19.06.2020 IN WP(C) 33822/2019(C) OF HIGH
COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANTS/RESPONDENTS 1 AND 2:
1 UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT
REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, CALICUT UNIVERSITY P. O.,
THENHIPALAM, MALAPPURAM - 673 635.
2 VICE CHANCELLOR
UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT, CALICUT UNIVERSITY P. O.,
THENHIPALAM, MALAPPURAM - 673 635.
BY ADV. SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN
RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS & 3RD RESPONDENT:
1 PRINCIPAL, M.E.S. MAMPAD COLLEGE(AUTONOMOUS)
MAMPAD COLLEGE P. O., MALAPPURAM - 676 542.
(BY ITS PRESENT PRINCIPAL DR. P. K. BABU)
2 CORPORATE MANAGER
M.E.S. AIDED COLLEGES, M.E.S. WOMEN'S COLLEGE BUILDING,
NADAKKAVU, KANNUR ROAD,
CALICUT - 673 011.
3 UNIVERSITY GRANTS COMMISSION- UGC
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, BAHADUR SHAH ZAFAR
MARG, NEW DELHI - 110 002.
R1-2 BY ADV. SRI.BABY ISSAC ILLICKAL
R3 BY SRI.S.KRISHNAMOORTHY, CGC
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11.09.2020,
ALONG WITH W.A. No. 2388/2019 & BATCH, THE COURT ON THE SAME
DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.A. No. 2388/2019 & batch :7:
[W.A. Nos. 2388, 2336, 2389, 2558, 2450 of 2019 & 934 of
2020]
JUDGMENT
Shaji. P. Chaly, J.
The first four captioned writ appeals are filed by the respondents challenging the common judgement of the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) Nos. 38450 of 2018, 29667, 28511 and 12830 of 2018 dated 03.04.2009. Whereas, the last two writ appeals are against the judgements in W.P.(C) No. 30545 of 2017 dated 20.06.2019 and W.P.(C) No. 33822 of 2019 dated 19.06.2020 respectively.
2. The basic issues for consideration are common in nature in regard to the adverse consequences that arose to the respondent colleges due to the action/inaction of the appellant University in the matter of approval for commencement of new courses/academic programmes sought for by them in their status as Autonomous Colleges. Therefore, we heard them together on agreement and propose to pass a common judgement. W.A. No. 2388 of 2019 is taken as the leading case and reference would be made in accordance with the pleadings therein, and the documents produced along with it.
3. It is an admitted fact that the respondent colleges were W.A. No. 2388/2019 & batch :8: conferred with autonomous status from the year 2014-2015, and 2015- 2016 onwards by the University Grants Commission. The autonomous status conferred on some of the respondent colleges is for the period from 2014-2015 to 2019-2020 and others from the year 2015-2016 to 2020-2021. The grievance of the respondent Colleges in the writ petitions were that though a special Law has been enacted and incorporated with respect to the autonomous colleges in the Calicut University Act, 1975 ('Act, 1975' for brevity) through the University Laws (Third Amendment) Ordinance, 2014 (Calicut), the appellant University was reluctant to follow the provisions in Chapter VIIB of Act, 1975, especially with regard to the matters in respect of the commencement of the new courses/academic programmes in autonomous colleges. According to the colleges, the appellant University was taking a stand that for the commencement of new courses/academic programmes in autonomous colleges, provisions under Chapter 23 of the Calicut University First Statutes, 1977 relating to the affiliation has to be followed by the autonomous Colleges and was refusing to follow the mandate contained under Chapter VIIIB of Act, 1975. The sum and substance of the contention advanced by the colleges in the writ petition was that the directions of the University Grants Commission, the autonomy granting authority as per the guidelines W.A. No. 2388/2019 & batch :9: and regulations which contains the provisions similar to Chapter VIIIB of the Act, 1975 have not been complied with by the appellant University. Even though the respondent Colleges have sought for commencement of new courses/academic programmes, they were either rejected or not taken any decision by the appellant University. Therefore, rejection of the approval sought for were under challenge in the writ petitions leading to first four writ appeals, while declarations were sought for in others, to declare that, by virtue of the deeming provisions contained under the Regulations of the UGC,and Chapter VIIIB of Act, 1975, such colleges were entitled to start and continue the courses on the basis of the steps taken by such colleges intimating the University about the new courses/programmes.
4. The learned single Judge, after considering the issues raised by the parties and taking into account the provisions of the UGC Regulations, 2018 and the provisions of Chapter VIIIB of Act, 1975 and so also following the judgment of this Court in Principal Rajagiri College of Social Sciences, Kakkanad v. M.G. University & ors. [2016 (4) KHC 489], has passed the following directions in the common judgment referred to above:
"30. Any delay in taking a decision on the proposal will be contrary to the very purpose for which the colleges are conferred with autonomous status. The University is duty bound to encourage W.A. No. 2388/2019 & batch : 10 : commencement of innovative academic programmes in such colleges. In view of these guidelines and Regulations 2018, the role of the University is as provided in Section 68(Q), according to which the proposal cannot be rejected except when the programme does not conform to that of a programme under the University or if it is lower in standard.
31. Therefore, the Board of Studies are only supposed to take a decision on the proposal relating to the academic programme strictly in tune with the proviso to Sub Section (3) of Section 68Q. Therefore these writ petitions are liable to be allowed.
The University shall place the proposals of the Governing Councils of the respective colleges again before the Board of Studies for approval of the academic programmes, for a decision afresh in accordance with Section 68Q(3) of Chapter VIIIB of the Calicut Univeristy Act, in tune with the judgment in Rajagiri College (supra) and the University shall communicate the decision to the Colleges within the statutory period, without insisting application for affiliation."
5. Whereas the last two writ appeals captioned above were allowed, and accordingly declared that there was deemed approval for commencement of the new programmes recommended by the Governing Council in accordance with the 2 nd proviso to Section 68Q(3) of Chapter VIIIB of the Act 1975, and therefore such colleges were free to commence those new programmes without payment of any separate affiliation fee and the University was also directed to take necessary steps to issue the degree certificates to W.A. No. 2388/2019 & batch : 11 : the students who have completed the course and passed the examination in W.P.(C) No. 30545 of 2017 leading to W.A. No. 2450 of 2019.
6. The contentions advanced by the University in the appeals are common in nature. The prime contention advanced is that 'affiliated college' is defined in Section 2(2) of the Act, 1975 to mean a College affiliated to the University in accordance with the provisions of Act, 1975 and the provisions of the University First Statutes, 1977 and the 'college' is defined in Section 2(7) to mean an institution maintained by, or affiliated to, the University, in which instruction is provided in accordance with the provisions of the Statutes, Ordinances and Regulations and therefore, every college intending to impart instructions is to get affiliation from the University. It is the case of the appellant University that for conduct of any course also, the Colleges should get affiliation. Therefore, the sum and substance of the contention advanced is that both the college and the courses are to get affiliation. In order to substantiate the said contentions, the University has relied upon Section 56 of Act, 1975 and Chapter 23 of the University First Statutes dealing with affiliation of colleges and the procedure and conditions to be satisfied for grant of affiliation of a college or course respectively. It is also submitted that merely because the W.A. No. 2388/2019 & batch : 12 : colleges are granted with autonomous status in terms of the UGC regulations, the Syndicate of the University is still vested with the powers to consider the grant of affiliation of courses in an affiliated college and therefore, the colleges are liable to get approval for the courses proposed by them. It is also pointed out that by virtue of Section 68Q of Act, 1975, the statutes and Regulations shall apply for affiliation in relation to the autonomous colleges and therefore, the directions issued by the learned Single Judge directing the Governing Councils of the respective colleges to place the proposals before the Board of Studies for the approval of the academic programmes for a decision afresh in accordance with Section 68Q(3) of Chapter VIIIB of the Act, 1975 in tune with the judgement in Rajagiri College (supra) without insisting for application for affiliation, cannot be sustained under law.
7. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent Colleges has submitted that consequent to the UGC guidelines produced as Ext.P8, the UGC Regulations, 2018 and Chapter VIIIB of Act, 1975, once affiliated colleges secure autonomous status, they were not liable to seek affiliation for the newly offered courses/academic programmes, but intimation alone was necessary.
8. The learned Standing Counsel for the UGC, relying upon W.A. No. 2388/2019 & batch : 13 : the statement filed in the writ petitions, submitted that all these colleges were conferred with autonomous status after the issuance of the UGC guidelines and consequential introduction of Chapter VIIIB in the the Act, 1975 with effect from 30th November 2013, and after making due enquiries.
9. We have heard the learned Standing Counsel for the appellant University, Sri. P.C. Sasidahran, learned counsel for the respondent Colleges, Sri. Isaac Kuruvilla Illikal, and Sri. S. Krishnamoorthy, learned Standing Counsel for the University Grants Commission .
10. The sole question to be considered is whether any manner of interference is warranted to the judgements of the learned Single Judge. In order to understand the liberty and status enjoyed by the Autonomous Colleges and arrive at a logical conclusion, it is better to have an overall view of the scheme of the Autonomous Colleges in accordance with the guidelines issued by the University Grants Commission for autonomous colleges during the XII Plan Period (2012-2017), which is produced as Ext.P8 in the leading case. From the introduction of the scheme, it is discernible that highlighting the importance of autonomous colleges, the UGC document on the XIIth Plan profile of higher education in India clearly stated that the only safe and better way to improve the W.A. No. 2388/2019 & batch : 14 : quality of undergraduate education is to de-link most of the colleges from the affiliating structure. It was found that colleges with academic and operative freedom are doing better and have more credibility, and it was thereupon, proposed to increase the number of autonomous colleges to spread the culture of autonomy and the target was to make 10 per cent of eligible colleges autonomous by the end of the XII Plan period. The UGC was conscious of the need for autonomy while evaluating that the affiliating system of colleges was originally designed when their number in a university was small and the university could then effectively oversee the working of the colleges, acting as an examining body and award degrees on their behalf. However, it was found to be becoming increasingly difficult for a university to attend to the varied needs of individual colleges and at the same time, the colleges were not conferred with the freedom to modernize their curricula or make them globally competent. It was also felt that the regulations of the University and its common system, governing all colleges alike, irrespective of their characteristic strengths, weaknesses and locations, have affected the academic development of individual colleges. Accordingly, it is stated thereunder that the 1964-66 Education Commission pointed out that the exercise of academic freedom by teachers is a crucial requirement for W.A. No. 2388/2019 & batch : 15 : development of the intellectual climate of our country, and that unless such a climate prevails, it is difficult to achieve excellence in our higher education system. It was also of the opinion that with students, teachers and management being co-partners in raising the quality of higher education, it is imperative that they share a major responsibility and hence, the Education Commission recommended college autonomy, which, in essence, is the instrument for promoting academic excellence.
11. Later, the National Policy on Education (1986-92) formulated certain objectives for autonomous college, which includes (1) the freedom to determine and prescribe its own courses of study and syllabi, and restructure and redesign the courses to suit local needs; (2) evolve methods of assessment of students' performance, the conduct of examinations and notification of results; (3) to use modern tools of educational technology to achieve higher standards and greater creativity, among others. That apart, it was suggested that Autonomous Colleges are free to make use of the expertise of the University Departments and other institutions to frame their curricula, devise methods of teaching, examination and evaluation and also to recruit their teachers in accordance with the existing procedures for private and Government Colleges. It was also intended that the parent W.A. No. 2388/2019 & batch : 16 : University will accept the methodologies of teaching examination, evaluation and course curriculum of its autonomous colleges. It will also help the colleges to develop their academic programmes, improve the faculty and to provide necessary guidance by participating in the deliberations of the different bodies of the colleges. The suggestion in respect of the role of the parent University was 1) to bring more autonomous colleges under its fold;
2) to promote academic freedom in autonomous colleges by encouraging introduction of innovative academic programmes; 3) to facilitate new courses of study, subject to the required minimum number of hours of instruction, content and standards; 4) to ensure that degrees/diplomas/certificates issued indicate the name of the college etc. Autonomous status was also proposed to be conferred to the institutions covering all the courses at U.G., P.G., Diploma, M. Phil Level, which are being run by the Institution at the time of conferment of autonomous status. It was also made clear that once autonomy is granted, the University shall accept the students of the Autonomous College for award of such degrees as are recommended by the Autonomous College and further that the Act and Statutes of the Universities ought to be amended to provide for the grant of autonomy to affiliated colleges. The guidelines also suggest the governance of an autonomous college by constituting W.A. No. 2388/2019 & batch : 17 : certain statutory bodies such as )Governing body 2) Academic Council 3) Board of Studies and 4) Finance Committee. The structure of the governing body was prescribed in Annexure III thereto. The composition and functions of the Academic Council are given in Annexure IV. The Academic Council will solely be responsible for all academic matters, such as framing of academic policy, approval of courses, regulations and syllabi etc. The Council will involve faculty at all levels and also experts from outside, including representatives of the University and the Government. The decision taken by the Academic Council will not be subject to any further ratification by the Academic Council or other statutory bodies of the University. The Board of Studies was made as the basic constituent of the academic system of an autonomous college and its functions will include framing the syllabi for various courses, reviewing and updating syllabi from time to time, introducing new courses of study, determining details of continuous assessment, recommending panels of examiners under the semester system etc. and the composition and functions of the Board of Studies are given in Annexure V. Likewise, responsibilities are given to the Finance Committee. Apart from all the discussed aspects, various other provisions were proposed by the UGC after evaluating the study reports specified above.
W.A. No. 2388/2019 & batch : 18 :
12. It was in accordance with the guidelines so issued by the University Grants Commission, the University Laws (Third Amendment) Ordinance, 2014 (Calicut University) was introduced as per Ordinance No.4 of 2014 by the Governor of Kerala amending the Calicut University Act, 1975 and the Acts of the other Universities within the State of Kerala. In effect, Chapter VIIIB was introduced into Act, 1975. The amendment came into force on and with effect from 30th day of November, 2013 and as per Section 2(1) of the Ordinance, 'academic council' is defined to mean a privilege of a college or University to conduct academic programmes, develop syllabus for the respective subjects, devise teaching, learning and evaluation methods, conduct examinations leading to the award of a degree, diploma, certificate and such other titles and distinctions by the University and publication of results in accordance with the provisions of the Act, 1975 and the Statutes, Ordinances, Regulations, bye-laws and the rules made thereunder. Section 4B of the Ordinance defines 'Autonomous College' to mean a college to which the status of autonomy is granted by the University Grants Commission with the concurrence of the State Government, in accordance with the provisions of Chapter VIIIB of the Act, 1975 and the Statutes, Ordinances, Regulations, bye-laws and rules made thereunder. W.A. No. 2388/2019 & batch : 19 :
13. As per Section 5A of the Ordinance "Board of Studies of an Autonomous College" is defined to mean the Board of Studies of an Autonomous College constituted under section 68H of Act, 1975. Chapter VIIIB therein deals with Autonomous Colleges. Section 68B(1) speaks of the Autonomy Approval Committee in Government consisting of various members right from the Minister- in-charge of the Higher Education Department, who shall be the Chairman; (b) the Vice-Chairman of the Kerala State Higher Education Council; (c) the Secretary to Government, Finance Department; (d) the Vice-Chancellors of the University of Kerala, the University of Calicut, the Mahatma Gandhi University and the Kannur University; (e) one representative of the Kerala State Higher Education Council nominated by the Government; (f) the Law Secretary, Government of Kerala; and (g)the Secretary to Government, Higher Education Department. Section 68C deals with the powers and functions of the Autonomy Approval Committee, which reads thus:
"68C.Powers and functions of the Autonomy Approval Committee --
(1)The Autonomy Approval Committee shall have the following powers and functions, namely:--
(i) to invite applications from the eligible colleges categorised as such under section 68N to apply for academic autonomy;
(ii) to prescribe criteria and conditions for admission of students and matters connected therewith, in conformity with and in addition to the W.A. No. 2388/2019 & batch : 20 : criteria for autonomous colleges prescribed by the University Grants Commission, for preserving high standards of quality of higher education;
(iii) to direct the University to forward the application of a college recommended by the Autonomy Approval Committee to the University Grants Commission for approval;
(iv) to enquire into any complaint or petition regarding the violation of the terms and conditions under which autonomy has been granted to a college;
(v) to consider the report of the Syndicate or the Academic Council on any matter pertaining to the breach or misuse of the standards set for autonomy by a college;
(vi) to rescind or alter the terms and conditions of academic autonomy granted to any college and to report the same to the University Grants Commission:
Provided that no such decision shall be taken without giving the Principal, in the case of a Government College for which autonomy has been granted and to the representative of the Manager of the College, in the case of Autonomous Colleges that is not a Government College, an opportunity of being heard.
(vii) to direct the University to implement the order rescinding or altering the terms and conditions of academic autonomy granted to an Autonomous College;
(viii) to hear appeals of the Autonomous Colleges;
(ix) to inspect or cause to inspect the records and the premises of any Autonomous College or any college that has applied for grant of academic autonomy for ascertaining any fact, or for any other purpose, relevant under this Chapter."
14. Section 68D(1) specifies that an affiliated college W.A. No. 2388/2019 & batch : 21 : authorised under Chapter VIII B to apply for academic autonomy to the University Grants Commission shall be deemed to be an Autonomous College of the University from the date on which it is granted autonomy by the University Grants Commission. Section 68E(1) delineates the Authorities of an Autonomous College, which are (i) the Academic Council of an Autonomous College; (ii) the Board of Studies of an Autonomous College; (iii) the Governing Council. Sub-Section (2) thereto specifies that notwithstanding anything contained in the Act, 1975 or the Statutes, Ordinances or Regulations made under the Act, all matters including the invitations, processing and approval of application for grant of autonomy, the constitution of the authorities in an Autonomous College and their powers and the powers of the University over an Autonomous College shall be dealt with in accordance with the provisions of the Chapter VIIIB. Section 68F deals with Academic Council of an Autonomous College, which consists of the Principal, who shall be the Chairman of the Council; all Heads of Departments in the College; four teachers of the college representing different departments, not below the rank of an Associate Professor, to be nominated by the Director of Collegiate Education in the case of Government Colleges and the Manager in the case of a college other than a Government College; not less than four experts from W.A. No. 2388/2019 & batch : 22 : outside the college representing the areas such as Industry, Commerce, Law, Education, Medicine, Engineering, Administration, Finance etc., to be nominated by the Governing Council of the Autonomous College; three nominees of the University who are academic experts not below the rank of an Associate Professor; one member from among the teachers of the college, nominated by the Principal, who shall be the Member Secretary of the Academic Council of the Autonomous College.
15. Section 68G deals with the powers and functions of the Academic Council of an Autonomous College, which reads thus:
"68G.Powers and functions of the Academic Council of an Autonomous College.--Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, the Academic Council of an Autonomous College shall have the following powers and functions, namely:--
(i) to scrutinize the proposals of Boards of Studies of an Autonomous College, with regard to the courses of study, academic regulations, curricula, syllabi and modifications thereof, instructional and evaluation arrangements, methods, procedures relevant thereto and to approve the same with or without modifications:
Provided that if the Academic Council of an Autonomous College differs on any proposal submitted by any Board of Studies of the Autonomous College, it may either reject the proposal giving reasons for the same or return the same to the Board of Studies of the Autonomous College with its remarks, for reconsideration:
Provided further that if the proposal is returned and the Board of studies re-submits the proposal to the Academic Council of the W.A. No. 2388/2019 & batch : 23 : college with or without the proposed modifications, the Academic Council shall approve the proposal;
(ii) to make academic regulations regarding the admission of students to different programmes of study in the college subject to the criteria and conditions prescribed by the Autonomy Approval Committee;
(iii) to make regulations for the conduct of examinations and initiate measures for improving quality of teaching, student evaluation and student advisory programmes in the college;
(iv) to make and approve proposals for research and advancement and dissemination of knowledge;
(v) to recommend to the Governing Council, any proposal for institution of new programmes of study;
(vi) to recommend to the Governing Council, regarding the institution of scholarships, studentships, fellowships, prizes and medals and to make regulations for the award of the same;
(vii) to advise the Governing Council on the suggestions made by it with respect to academic affairs and;
(viii) to perform such other academic functions as may be assigned to it by the Governing Council."
16. Section 68H deals with the Board of Studies of an Autonomous College, and sub-Secton( 1) thereto prescribes that every autonomous college shall constitute a board of studies of its own for each subject of study or group of subjects in which the college conduct courses or intends to conduct courses, which consists of (a) Head of the Department not below the rank of an Associate Professor, if he has a Ph.D, on the basis of seniority from among the Heads of Departments whose subjects are covered by W.A. No. 2388/2019 & batch : 24 : that Board of Studies, who shall be the Chairman of the Board; (b) not more than six teachers with Ph. D nominated by the Principal in consultation with the Head of the Departments offering subjects covered by that Board of Studies, from different areas of specialisation, as identified by the Principal, in subjects covered by that Board of Studies; (c) two experts in the subject from outside the college to be nominated by the Academic Council of the Autonomous College; (d) one expert to be nominated by the Vice- Chancellor from a panel of six experts recommended by the Principal; (e) one representative each from industry, corporate sector or allied area relating to placement; (f) one meritorious alumnus who has completed a Postgraduate Programme of the University, to be nominated by the Principal.
17. The powers and functions of Board of Studies of an Autonomous College is prescribed under Section 68I which includes preparation of curriculum for various academic programmes keeping in view the objectives of the college, interest of the stake holders and national requirement, with the approval of the Academic Council of the Autonomous College; to recommend books wherein the prescribed subjects are suitably dealt with, for the reference of teachers and students and also to recommend text books as and when required, among others. Section 68M deals with the powers W.A. No. 2388/2019 & batch : 25 : and functions of the Governing Council, which reads thus:
"68M. Powers and functions of the Governing Council.--Subject to the provisions laid down by the bye-laws, if any, of the respective Autonomous College and the rules made by the State Government and the University, the Governing Council shall have the following powers, namely:--
(i) to approve and submit to the University, the institution of new programmes of study leading to the award of degrees and diplomas;
(ii) to conduct examinations for each course and publish the results;
(iii) to recommend and forward the results of examinations, to the University for the award of degree or diploma, as the case may be;
(iv) to approve the issue of marklists to the students;
(v) to fix the fees and other charges payable by the students of the Autonomous College with the concurrence of the Government:
Provided that in the case of aided courses or courses restructured from the aided courses, the fees shall be as determined by the Government;
(vi) to institute scholarships, fellowships, studentships, medals and certificates on the recommendations of the Academic Council of the Autonomous College;
(vii) to make regulations for sports, extra-curricular activities, proper maintenance and functioning of the playgrounds and hostels;
(viii) to exercise such other powers and perform such other functions and to constitute such Committees as it may deem necessary for the proper development of the Autonomous College and to fulfil the objectives of autonomy.
18. Section 68N deals with the procedure for granting autonomy and it reads thus:
W.A. No. 2388/2019 & batch : 26 :
"68N. Procedure for granting autonomy.--
(1) The Autonomy Approval Committee shall, every year, invite applications from the eligible colleges categorised as such under sub-section (2) for recommending the granting of autonomy.
(2) The Autonomy Approval Committee shall specify the categories of colleges as eligible colleges for recommending for the granting of autonomy, which may be Government College, Unaided College and Private College other than Unaided College and such categories from which applications are invited, the criteria for eligibility for granting autonomy, the forms in which the application has to be submitted. The documents necessary with the application and other information as are deemed necessary by the Autonomy Approval Committee shall also be specified:
Provided that no such criterion shall have the effect of lowering the standards prescribed by the University Grants Commission for the grant of the status of autonomy.
(3) The Autonomy Approval Committee shall scrutinise the applications received from the eligible colleges and accept those from the colleges satisfying the criteria prescribed by the Autonomy Approval Committee.
4. The Autonomy Approval Committee may constitute a committee either from among itself with experts in the field of higher education or a committee of experts as it deems fit, to inspect the facilities in the college and verify records of the college relevant to the grant of autonomy.
5. The Committee constituted under sub-section (4) shall have the power to enter into the college premises and its building and the college shall be bound to facilitate such inspection and furnish all information and records pertinent to the enquiry, to the Committee. W.A. No. 2388/2019 & batch : 27 :
6. The Committee constituted by the Autonomy Approval Committee under this section may give instructions to the Principal of the college to rectify the defects in meeting the criteria of eligibility prescribed by the Autonomy Approval Committee.
7. Where the Autonomy Approval Committee is satisfied itself that a college that has submitted application meets the criteria prescribed for grant of autonomy, it shall forward its reccommendation for the grant of autonomy to the college, to the Vice-Chancellor.
8. On receipt of a recommendation under sub-section (7), the Vice-Chancellor shall cause the application for grant of autonomy to be forwarded to the University Grants Commission, with the seal of the officer of the University, as prescribed by the Commission, within fifteen working days from the date of receipt of the intimation by the Vice-Chancellor.
19. Section 68O deals with conduct of examinations and the manager of an Autonomous College is conferred with powers to appoint a person not below the rank of an associate Professor as the controller of examinations for the Autonomous College, however subject to other qualifications. Section 68P deals with 'award of degrees', which reads thus:
"68P. Award of Degrees.--
(1) The University shall award degrees, diplomas, titles, certificates and other academic distinctions to the students evaluated and recommended by an Autonomous College after levying a reasonable fee as may be prescribed by the University for the same:
Provided that such degree, diploma, title or certificates shall be W.A. No. 2388/2019 & batch : 28 : in a common format prescribed by the University:
Provided further that the name of an Autonomous College shall be mentioned in the certificate conferring the degree, diploma, title, certificate and other academic distinctions, if such college requests for the same.
(2) The University shall issue the degree, diploma, title or certificates within forty-five working days of the receipt of recommendations from an Autonomous College.
Section 68Q deals with the powers of University over Autonomous Colleges, which is relevant to the context, and reads thus:
"68Q. Powers of University over Autonomous Colleges.--
(1) Subject to the provisions of this Chapter and the provisions of the Statutes, Ordinances, Regulations, bye-laws and rules made thereunder, the University shall have all other powers over the Autonomous Colleges as are applicable to any affiliated college of the University under this Act and the Statutes, Ordinances and the Regulations made thereunder.
(2) Where the Governing Council of an Autonomous College has approved and recommended any academic programme to the University, the Vice-Chancellor shall cause the proposal to be placed before the relevant Board of Studies of the University:
Provided that where there is no Board of Studies with respect to the academic programme proposed, the University shall constitute a Board of Studies or an Expert Committee for the purpose:
Provided further that the Expert Committee so appointed shall have adequate number of members to facilitate a fair and objective assessment of the Academic Programme submitted to the University.
(3) The Board of Studies or the Expert Committee, as the case W.A. No. 2388/2019 & batch : 29 : may be, shall, within thirty working days from the date of receipt of the proposal, consider it for the Academic Programme referred to in sub-
section (2) and approve, reject or return the same, with remarks, to the Vice-Chancellor:
Provided that such rejection shall be on the ground that the proposal received from the Governing Council of an Autonomous College does not conform to the duration, number of credits, evaluation and grading system for that Academic Programme already prescribed by the University or where the Board of Studies or Expert Committee feels, for reasons to be recorded in writing, that the proposal of the Governing Council of an Autonomous College will have the effect of lowering academic standards:
Provided further that where the Autonomous College which submitted the proposal has not been informed of the decision within thirty working days from the date of submission of the proposal to the University, the proposal shall be deemed to have been approved by the University.
(4) Where the Board of Studies or Expert Committee returns the proposal to the Vice-Chancellor with remarks pointing out the defects for transmitting the same to the Governing Council of an Autonomous College, the Governing Council may re-submit the proposal to the University with its remarks within thirty working days of receipt of such remarks.
(5) The Board of Studies shall, thereafter, within a period of thirty working days, either approve or reject the proposal and the Vice-
Chancellor shall intimate the same to the Governing Council of the college:
Provided that where the Autonomous College resubmitting the proposal has not been informed of the decision within thirty working days from the date of re-submission of the proposal to the University, the proposal W.A. No. 2388/2019 & batch : 30 : shall be deemed to have been approved by the University.
(6)A copy of all such approvals or rejections shall be sent to the Autonomy Approval Committee.
(7) All such decisions to approve or reject the proposal shall be reported to the Academic Council of the Autonomous College:
Provided that the Academic Council of the Autonomous College may, if it differs with the decision, address the Chancellor for a review of the same.
(8) The Governing Council of an Autonomous College may appeal to the Autonomy Approval Committee against any order of rejection and the decision thereon of the Autonomy Approval Committee shall be final:
Provided that where the Autonomy Approval Committee deems it fit, it may appoint a panel of experts to advise the Autonomy Approval Committee in arriving at a decision on the appeal so preferred.
(9) The Syndicate of the University shall have powers to inspect to verify whether a college that has been granted autonomy by the University Grants Commission violates the conditions specified for the grant of such autonomy.
(10) For the purpose of sub-section (9), the Syndicate may constitute a Committee either from among itself with experts in the field or a committee of experts as it deems fit, to inspect the facilities in the college, verify records of the college relevant to the purpose of the above inspection:
Provided that such experts shall be nominated by the Vice- Chancellor:
Provided further that such enquiry shall extend only to complaints or information in writing regarding the violation of the conditions of autonomy, poor academic and administrative practices that lower quality W.A. No. 2388/2019 & batch : 31 : of higher education or unethical practices in the matter of admissions, levying fees and conduct of examinations, adopted by the college for which autonomous status was granted.
(11) The Committee constituted under sub-section (10) shall not finalise any report without giving the representative of the college that has been granted autonomy, a fair and reasonable opportunity of being heard.
(12) The Syndicate shall, after consideration of the report of the said Committee, recommend to the Autonomy Approval Committee through the Vice-Chancellor, the suspension or revocation of the autonomy granted to it.
(13) If any complaint or information in writing is received in Government with respect to an Autonomous College, the Government may, after due consideration of the contents of the complaint and the importance of the same, refer it to the Autonomy Approval Committee:
Provided that such reference shall extend only to complaints or information received in writing, with respect to violation of the conditions of autonomy, poor academic and administrative practices that lower quality of higher education or unethical practices in the matter of admissions, levying fees and conduct of examinations, adopted by the college for which autonomous status has been granted.
(14) On receipt of any report of the University containing its recommendations under sub-section (12) or on receipt of any reference from Government under sub-section (13), the Autonomy Approval Committee shall consider the report or reference, as the case may be :
Provided that the Autonomy Approval Committee may conduct an enquiry for which it may constitute a committee either from among itself or from among the field of experts as it deems fit, to conduct the enquiry.W.A. No. 2388/2019 & batch : 32 :
(15) The Committee constituted under sub-section (14) shall have powers to inspect the facilities in the college and to verify records of the college relevant to the purpose of such enquiry.
(16) All Autonomous Colleges shall furnish records and provide information sought by the Committee for the purpose of such enquiry:
Provided that no such enquiry shall be completed without giving the Principal of the Autonomous College a fair and reasonable opportunity of being heard.
(17) Each Autonomous College shall submit a Manual of Examinations to the University within six months before the date of the first set of examinations that it proposes to conduct in the college and the University shall offer its remarks on the Manual within sixty working days of such submission. The remarks of the University shall be offered with the object of improving the safeguards in the conduct of the examinations and for ensuring the integrity of the examinations conducted by an Autonomous College. The Autonomous College shall, as far as possible, incorporate all the necessary modifications consistent with the remarks of the University, in the Manual and where it is unable to do so, shall intimate the University in writing the reasons for its inability to do so.
20. Section 68R deals with the power of University to amend Statutes, Ordinances and Regulations and sub-Section (1) specifies that the University shall have power to amend its Statutes, Ordinances, Regulations, bye-laws and rules to give effect to the provisions of Chapter VIIIB of Act, 1975. However, the proviso makes it clear that the grant of autonomy to Colleges eligible under the provisions of the Chapter VIIIB and the Statutes, Ordinances W.A. No. 2388/2019 & batch : 33 : and Regulations made thereunder shall not be withheld on account of the pendency of such amendments. Sub-Section (3) thereto enables the Academic Council of an Autonomous College to make Regulations for the purposes mentioned in Chapter VIIIB with the approval of the University, notwithstanding anything contained in the Act, 1975 and the proviso thereto makes it clear that the procedure for making Regulations, prescribed in Section 39 of Act, 1975 shall not be applicable for making such Regulations.
21. While so, the University Grants Commission has introduced, University Grants Commission (Conferment of Autonomous Status Upon Colleges and Measures for Maintenance of Standard in Autonomous Colleges) Regulations, 2018 (hereinafter called 'Regulations, 2018'). Preamble of Regulations, 2018 states that whereas the UGC is mandated to co-ordinate and determine the standards of higher education in universities; and whereas college autonomy is instrumental for promoting broad based quality education and excellence; and therefore, in exercise of powers conferred by clause( j) of section 12 read with clauses (f) and (g) of sub-section (1) of section 26 of the University Grants Commission Act, 1956 the regulations are made. Regulation 1.2 states that the regulations shall apply to all colleges/institutions which are affiliated to, or are constituent colleges of universities in the country seeking W.A. No. 2388/2019 & batch : 34 : the conferment of autonomous college status.
22. Regulation 3 deals with role/ terms and conditions of an autonomous college and regulation 3.1 specifies that review existing courses/programmes and, restructure, redesign and prescribe its own courses/programmes of study and syllabi. Regulation 3.2 enables the autonomous college to formulate new courses/programmes within the nomenclature specified by UGC as per the specification of degrees 2014 and amended from time to time. Regulation 3.5 specifies that Autonomous Colleges need not pay affiliation fees to the parent university every year and one time fee can be paid at the time of conferment of autonomous status, and such fees can be decided by the executive council of the parent university. Regulation 3.9 is very significant, which specifies that the Autonomous College shall have complete administrative autonomy and have the privilege of appointing their own administrative staff and teaching faculty including Principal. However, the staff will be appointed as per the UGC (Minimum Qualifications for Appointment of Teachers and other Academic Staff in Universities and Colleges and Measures for the Maintenance of Standards in Higher Education) Regulations, 2010 as amended from time to time. Regulation 3.11 states that autonomy granted to the college is at the institutional level and is not partial and shall cover the W.A. No. 2388/2019 & batch : 35 : programmes at all levels such as UG, PG and Ph.D offered by the colleges and the courses introduced by the colleges after the conferment of autonomous status shall come under the purview of autonomy.
23. Regulation 4 deals with role of the parent University and regulation 4.1 thereto obliges the parent university to forward the application of the college for autonomous status/ provide nominee on the expert committee/various statutory bodies and issue notification within 30 days for a college to function as an autonomous entity once autonomous status is conferred on the college. Regulation 4.2 is a deeming provision, by which it is prescribed that if the University does not forward the proposal/provide a nominee within 30 days, it shall be presumed that the university has no objection to the processing of the proposal by the UGC for conferment of autonomous status. Regulation 5 is an enabling provision to the State Government to provide nominees on the expert committee/various statutory bodies within 30 days. Regulation 7 deals with conferment/extension of autonomous status. Regulations 7.1 to 7.10 are relevant to the context and they read thus:
7.1. A College intending to become autonomous shall make an application in the format specified by the Commission any time during the year.W.A. No. 2388/2019 & batch : 36 :
7.2 The college shall forward an advance copy of the proposal to University Grants Commission indicating the date of receipt of the proposal by the parent university for the record of the UGC. 7.3. The college shall submit the proposal to the Parent/Affiliating University which may forward the same to UGC within 30 days of the receipt of proposal. In case the proposal is rejected by the University, the decision shall be communicated to the college and University Grants Commission through a "Speaking Order.". 7.4.If the University and the State Govt. fail to provide the nominees for the UGC Expert Committee, the UGC may proceed with the on-spot visit and take decision on the proposal of the College.
7.5. If the College is found eligible as per the guidelines, the Commission shall examine the proposal for conferment/extension of autonomous status with an onsite visit by an Expert Committee constituted by the Chairman of the Commission consisting of three expert members (preferably at the level of Professor/Principal of an autonomous college) out of which one shall be the Chairperson, nominees from the Parent/Affiliating University and the State Government. A UGC official may be nominated to co-ordinate the visit.
7.6. The decision for conferment/extension of autonomous status shall be taken by the Standing Committee (comprising of three Commission members) on autonomous colleges after due consideration of the recommendations of the Expert Committee.
The approval letters may be issued on the basis of the decision of the standing committee. The decisions may be ratified by the Commission subsequently.
7.7. If the proposal of a College for the conferment of autonomous W.A. No. 2388/2019 & batch : 37 : status is rejected for any reason whatsoever, the college shall be eligible to reapply, but not before one year from the date of rejection of its earlier proposal.
7.8. The autonomous college shall apply in the prescribed format to University Grants Commission for extension of autonomous status six months prior to expiry of the autonomy cycle. 7.9. In case of expiry of accreditation cycle, the College seeking extension of autonomous status must submit a proof of having applied for accreditation by NAAC.NBA to be eligible for extension.
7.10. Till the extension of autonomous status is awarded by the UGC, the College shall continue to avail the autonomous status. The UGC shall also consider the interim period while granting extension of autonomous status to the college."
24. Regulation 10 deals with matters regarding starting of new courses which enables an Autonomous College to start certain courses without prior approval of the University. Regulation 10.1 specifies that an Autonomous College is free to start diploma (undergraduate and post graduate) or certificate courses without prior approval of the University; however, approval of the concerned statutory bodies of the college may be obtained wherever required. It further states that diplomas and certificates shall be issued under the seal of the college. However, the University should be informed about the introduction of new courses. Regulation 10.2 enables an Autonomous College to start a new W.A. No. 2388/2019 & batch : 38 : degree or postgraduate course/Ph.D with the approval of the academic council of the college and concerned statutory council(s), wherever required, provided, the nomenclature of the degree is in consonance with UGC notification on specification of degrees, 2014 as amended from time to time, however such courses shall fulfil the minimum standards prescribed by the Universities/UGC in terms of number of hours, curricular content and standards, and the university shall be duly informed of such courses.
25. Regulation 13 is in regard to Governance of an Autonomous College, which contains the Governing Body, Academic Council, Board of Studies and Finance Committee. Regulation 13.3.A deals with constitution of governing body of private/ self-financing college/constituent college run by trust/society, which consists of 12 members and among them apart from the management, teachers of the college and the Principal of the college, there are one each nominee of State Government, University and an educationist or industrialist. Functions of the Governing Body prescribed thereunder specify that subject to the existing provision in the bye-laws of respective college and the rules laid down by the State Government/parent University, the Governing Body shall, among other things, guide the college while fulfilling the objectives for which the college has been granted autonomous status; institute W.A. No. 2388/2019 & batch : 39 : scholarships, fellowships, studentships, medals, prizes and certificate on the recommendations of the academic council; approve new programmes of study leading to degrees and/or diplomas. Regulation 13.4 deals with Academic Council and its composition. The Academic Council is headed by the Principal, who is the Chairman, and apart from the Heads of the Departments in the college and four teachers of the college representing different categories of teaching staff by rotation on the basis of seniority of service in the college, there are other experts/academicians from outside the college from various disciplines and three nominees of the University not less than professors. The Academic Council shall have the powers among other powers to scrutinize and approve the proposals with or without modifications of the Boards of Studies with regard to courses of study, academic regulations, curricula, syllabi and modifications thereof, instructional and evaluation arrangements methods, procedures relevant thereto etc., provided that where the Academic Council differs on any proposal, it shall have the right to return the matter for reconsideration to the Board of Studies concerned or reject it, after giving reasons to do so; recommend to the Governing Body proposals for institution of new programmes of study; advise the governing body on suggestions pertaining to academic affairs made by it. Regulation 13.5 deals W.A. No. 2388/2019 & batch : 40 : with composition of Board of Studies and the Chairman of the Board is the Head of the Department concerned. Among various members, one expert is to be nominated by the Vice-Chancellor from a panel of six persons recommended by the college Principal. The Board of Studies of a Department in the college shall (a) prepare syllabi for various courses, keeping in view the objectives of the college, interest of the stakeholders and national requirement for consideration and approval of the Academic Council; (b) suggest methodologies for innovative teaching and evaluation techniques among other duties. Regulation 14 is dealing with consequences of violation of regulation and 14.1 specifies that all UGC directives shall be strictly followed, failing which, UGC may take appropriate actions, as it deems fit, against the defaulting Autonomous College.
26. On a reading of the UGC Guidelines, Regulations, 2018 th and Chapter VIII B of Act, 1975 as amended with effect from 30 November, 2013, it is specific and clear that the Autonomous Colleges are vested with powers to carry out its academic and other activities in accordance with the provisions contained thereunder. It is an admitted fact that the colleges in question are all affiliated to the Calicut University and have secured autonomous status from the University Grants Commission. Even though a faint attempt is made W.A. No. 2388/2019 & batch : 41 : by the counsel for the appellant University while addressing the arguments that the colleges have secured the autonomy status without following the procedure mandated under the aforesaid laws from the additional documents produced by the respondent college in writ appeal No.934/2020, we are satisfied that the procedure mandated under law for the purpose as is discussed above has been undertaken by the colleges. Annexure 1 produced by the college in the said appeal makes it clear that it was on the basis of the decision taken by the Autonomy Approval Committee constituted as rd per the 3 amended Ordinance, 2013 that the applications were forwarded to the University Grants Commission, which is dated 23/12/2013 in respect of four colleges. It is also evident that similar communications were forwarded by the University to the UGC in respect of other colleges and the other documents produced also would show that the UGC has forwarded necessary communications to the University. Therefore, the submissions so made during the course of arguments have no force at all.
27. Learned counsel for the University has taken us through Section 56 of Act, 1975 dealing with affiliation of colleges, but we are of the considered opinion that it is a stand alone provision for affiliation of colleges and affiliation in new courses in any affiliated college, other than the autonomous colleges. True, a procedure is W.A. No. 2388/2019 & batch : 42 : prescribed in the matter of affiliation of colleges and new courses. But, however when Chapter VIII B is introduced as per Ordinance 4 of 2014 to the Act, 1975 on and with effect from 30.11.2013, to deal with Autonomous Colleges, it will have to be treated and looked upon as, independently existing de hors other provisions of the Act,1975, especially due to the fact that Chapter VIIIB is a code by itself when read along with the UGC guidelines and the Regulations, 2018. Therefore, the contention advanced by learned Standing Counsel for the University that irrespective of the provisions of Chapter VIIIB of Act, 1975, the University is entitled to invoke the other powers of Act, 1975 cannot be sustained under law. Learned Standing Counsel for University has also referred to Section 68R(3) of Chapter VIIIB of Act, 1975 and submitted that since the instant colleges have not made regulations for the purposes of Chapter VIIIB with the approval of the University, no new courses or programmes can be affiliated by the University. However, on a reading of sub-section (3) of Section 68R, it is clear that it is a non obstante clause whereby notwithstanding anything contained in the Act, 1975, the Academic Council of an Autonomous College and the Governing Council may make regulations for the purposes mentioned in Chapter VIIIB with the approval of University. On a fair appreciation of the said provision, we are quite satisfied that W.A. No. 2388/2019 & batch : 43 : section 68R(3) is an enabling provision that enables the Autonomous College to make regulations to deal with the purposes mentioned in Chapter VIIIB and the University is not at liberty to compel the Autonomous Colleges or adopt a stand that the University will affiliate a new course only if a regulation is made by an Autonomous College. However, the proviso thereto makes it clear that if any regulations are made by the Autonomous College, it shall follow the procedure prescribed under Section 39 of Act, 1975 dealing with the procedure for making regulations. On an analysis of Section 39 of Act, 1975, it is unequivocal that the regulations made under Section 39 shall have effect from such date as the Academic Council of the University may direct. As specified above, every college given the status of autonomy by the UGC is entitled to enjoy the powers and privileges conferred under the UGC guidelines, Regulations, 2018 and the provisions of Chapter VIIIB of Act, 1975 and therefore, we are of the definite opinion that the University is not vested with any powers or entitled to employ the provisions of Act, 1975 and the First Statute 1977 overlooking the provisions of Chapter VIIIB of Act, 1975 introduced as per Ordinance, 2014. In this regard, the the counsel for the colleges has relied upon the judgment of this Court in Rajagiri College of Social Sciences (supra), wherein the typical provisions of Mahatma Gandhi W.A. No. 2388/2019 & batch : 44 : University Act, 1985 was considered and held that there is no requirement for an affiliation, since an affiliated college and Autonomous College are treated differently by the Act itself and that the only stipulation is that the Autonomous Colleges are subject to various provisions of the Statutes, Ordinances, Regulations, Rules and bye-laws and such powers can be exercised by the University, similar to those exercised on Autonomous Colleges. We are in respectful agreement with the judgment of the learned Single Judge, especially in view of the fact that the issues that are re- appreciated by us in the instant appeals were considered taking into account the laws of the UGC and the provisions of the Mahatma Gandhi University Act, 1985 which are akin to the provisions of Chapter VIIIB of Calicut University Act, 1975 as amended by Ordinance, 2014.
28. The discussions made above also would make it clear that an Autonomous College needs to intimate the University with respect to the new courses/programmes and the University is only vested with the limited powers as is delineated under section 68Q of Chapter VIIIB of Act, 1975 to decline approval/ concurrence. It is also clear that if no communication is made within 30 days on receipt of the request from the Autonomous College, it is deemed to have been approved by the University by virtue of the provisos W.A. No. 2388/2019 & batch : 45 : contained under section 68Q(5)of Chapter VIIIB of Act, 1975. The learned Single Judge has clearly found after assimilating the fact situations and the documents produced by the respondent colleges that the action of the University in rejecting the approval sought for outside the purview of the powers conferred under section 68Q of Chapter VIIIB of Act, 1975, the UGC Guidelines and the Regulations are bad. On re-appreciation of the pleadings and the documents produced by the colleges, we are satisfied that the approval sought for were declined after the introduction of the Regulations, 2018 on and with effect from 12th February, 2018 and the arguments advanced otherwise cannot be sustained, since it is without any foundation. We are also of the considered view that the action of the university was quite detrimental to the scheme made by the UGC as discussed above, and if the stand adopted by the university is to be accepted, the target sought to be achieved by conferring autonomous status and thus to attain higher standards of education would be defeated. No doubt, the autonomous colleges are duty bound to ensure that adequate standards are maintained so as to equip the students to compete globally. But, fact remains, the guidelines of the UGC, the Regulation, 2018 and Chapter VIIIB of Act, 1975 make it clear that adequate safeguards are incorporated in the matter of grant of autonomy by the Autonomy Approval W.A. No. 2388/2019 & batch : 46 : Committee and in the matter of constitution of authorities of an Autonomous College by including representatives of the State, University and other competent and experts in the field and the subject. The said aspects persuade us to think that the State while carrying out the amendment to Act, 1975 was very well conscious for ensuring that the Autonomous Colleges are regulated and controlled to achieve the goal and purpose of the intentions and scheme of the University Grants Commission. But, at the same time, the State Government has virtually translated the intentions of the UGC as per its guidelines by incorporating Chapter VIIIB to Act, 1975 with the hopeful intention of de-linking the colleges from the immediate regulations of the University as per the other provisions of Act, 1975.
29. That apart we are of the considered opinion that by virtue of Entry 66 of List I Schedule VII of the Constitution of India, the Union Government is the sole authority vested with powers for co- ordination and determination of standards in institutions for higher education or Research and Scientific and Technical Institutions. Therefore, at any stretch of imagination, it can be said that the University has power over and above the powers enjoyed by the University Grants Commission in the matter of grant of autonomous status and the laws made for regulating the same. The situation W.A. No. 2388/2019 & batch : 47 : would be made clear on understanding the powers enjoyed by the State Government under Entry 25 of List III of Schedule VII of the Constitution of India dealing with education, including Technical Education, Medical Education and Universities which are subject to the provisions of Entries 63, 64 and 65 of List I of Schedule VII of the Constitution of India. We are also conscious of the fact that Entry 32 of List II of Schedule VII deals with Universities. However, the legal position with regard to the said aspect is so well settled in a plethora of decisions of the Apex Court.
30. Learned counsel for the colleges in that regard invited our attention to the judgement of the Apex Court in Prof.Yashpal and Another v. State of Chhattisgarh and others [(2005) 5 SCC 420] wherein after conducting a threadbare survey of the earlier judgments on the subject, has held as follows in paragraphs 28 to 33:
"28. Though incorporation of a university as a legislative head is a State subject (Entry 32 List II) but basically a university is an institution for higher education and research. Entry 66 of List I is coordination and determination of standards in institutions for higher education or research and scientific and technical institutions. There can thus be a clash between the powers of the State and that of the Union. The interplay of various entries in this regard in the three lists of the Seventh Schedule and the real import of Entry 66 of List I have been examined in several decisions of this Court. In Gujarat University v. Krishna Ranganath Mudholkar a decision by a W.A. No. 2388/2019 & batch : 48 : Constitution Bench rendered prior to the Forty-second Amendment when Entry 11 of List II was in existence, it was held that Items 63 to 66 of List I are carved out of the subject of education and in respect of these items the power to legislate is vested exclusively in Parliament. The use of the expression "subject to" in Item 11 of List II of the Seventh Schedule clearly indicates that the legislation in respect of excluded matters cannot be undertaken by the State Legislatures. In AIR para 23, the Court held as under: (SCR pp. 137-
38) "Power of the State to legislate in respect of education including universities must to the extent to which it is entrusted to the Union Parliament, whether such power is exercised or not, be deemed to be restricted. If a subject of legislation is covered by Items 63 to 66 even if it otherwise falls within the larger field of 'education including universities' power to legislate on that subject must lie with Parliament. ... 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 overlapping, 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."
29. The following observations in AIR paras 24 and 25 highlight the supremacy of legislation made by Parliament with reference to Entry 66: (SCR pp. 140-41) "[24.] ... The validity of the State legislation on university education and as regards the education in technical and scientific institutions not W.A. No. 2388/2019 & batch : 49 : 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 coordination 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 coordination and determination of standards, that would have paramountcy over the State law by virtue of the first part of Article 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.
* * * [25.] ... Item 66 is a legislative head and in interpreting it, unless it is expressly or of necessity found conditioned by the words used therein, a narrow or restricted interpretation will not be put upon the generality of the words. Power to legislate on a subject should normally be held to extend to all ancillary or subsidiary matters which can fairly and reasonably be said to be comprehended in that subject. Again there is nothing either in Item 66 or elsewhere in the Constitution which supports the submission that the expression 'coordination' must mean in the context in which it is used merely evaluation, coordination in its normal connotation means harmonising or bringing into proper relation in which all the things coordinated participate in a common pattern of action. The power to coordinate, therefore, is not merely power to evaluate, it is a power to harmonise or secure relationship for concerted action. The power conferred by Item 66 List I is not conditioned by the existence of a state of emergency or unequal standards calling for the exercise of the power."
W.A. No. 2388/2019 & batch : 50 :
30. The same question was also examined in considerable detail in State of T.N. v. Adhiyaman Educational and Research Institute and the conclusions drawn were summarised in para 41 of the Report and sub-paras (i) and (ii) thereof are being reproduced below: (SCC pp. 134-35) "41. (i) The expression 'coordination' used in Entry 66 of the Union List of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution does not merely mean evaluation. It means harmonisation with a view to forge a uniform pattern for a concerted action according to a certain design, scheme or plan of development. It, therefore, includes action not only for removal of disparities in standards but also for preventing the occurrence of such disparities. It would, therefore, also include power to do all things which are necessary to prevent what would make 'coordination' either impossible or difficult. This power is absolute and unconditional and in the absence of the valid compelling reasons, it must be given its full effect according to its plain and express intention.
(ii) To the extent that the State legislation is in conflict with the Central legislation though the former is purported to have been made under Entry 25 of the Concurrent List but in effect encroaches upon legislation including subordinate legislation made by the Centre under Entry 25 of the Concurrent List or to give effect to Entry 66 of the Union List, it would be void and inoperative."
31. In Osmania University Teachers' Assn. v. State of A.P. the Court reiterated that it was the exclusive responsibility of the Central Government to determine the standards for higher education and the same should not be lowered at the hands of any particular State as it W.A. No. 2388/2019 & batch : 51 : was of great importance to national progress. After referring to the Constitution Bench decision in Kerala SEB v. Indian Aluminium Co. Ltd. where it was held that when an entry is in general terms in List II and part of that entry is in specific terms in List I, the entry in List I takes effect notwithstanding the entry in List II, the Court held as under in para 14 of the Report: (SCC p. 676) "14. Entry 25 List III relating to education including technical education, medical education and universities has been made subject to the power of Parliament to legislate under Entries 63 to 66 of List I. Entry 66 List I and Entry 25 List III should, therefore, be read together. Entry 66 gives power to Union to see that a required standard of higher education in the country is maintained. The standard of higher education including scientific and technical should not be lowered at the hands of any particular State or States. Secondly, it is the exclusive responsibility of the Central Government to coordinate and determine the standards for higher education. That power includes the power to evaluate, harmonise and secure proper relationship to any project of national importance. It is needless to state that such a coordinate action in higher education with proper standards, is of paramount importance to national progress. It is in this national interest, the legislative field in regard to 'education' has been distributed between List I and List III of the Seventh Schedule."
32. The interplay of Entry 66 List I and Entry 25 List III was again examined by a Constitution Bench in Preeti Srivastava (Dr.) v. State of M.P. in the context of lowering of standards by the State for admission to a postgraduate course in a medical college and it was held that the State cannot while controlling education in the State W.A. No. 2388/2019 & batch : 52 : impinge on standards in institutions for higher education because this is exclusively within the purview of the Union Government. While considering the question whether norms for admission have any connection with the standards of education and that they are only covered by Entry 25 of List III, it was observed that any lowering of the norms of admission does have an adverse effect on the standards of education in the institutions of higher education. The standard of education in an institution depends on various factors like (i) the calibre of teaching staff; (ii) a proper syllabus designed to achieve a high level of education in a given span of time; (iii) the student- teacher ratio; (iv) equipment and laboratory facilities; (v) calibre of the students admitted; (vi) adequate accommodation in the institution;
(vii) the standard of examinations held including the manner in which the papers are set and examined; and (viii) the evaluation of practical examinations done. It was pointed out that education involves a continuous interaction between the teachers and the students. The base of teaching, the level to which teaching can rise and the benefit which the students ultimately receive depends as much on the calibre of the students as on the calibre of the teachers and the availability of adequate infrastructural facilities.
33. The consistent and settled view of this Court, therefore, is that in spite of incorporation of universities as a legislative head being in the State List, the whole gamut of the university which will include teaching, quality of education being imparted, curriculum, standard of examination and evaluation and also research activity being carried on will not come within the purview of the State Legislature on account of a specific entry on coordination and determination of standards in institutions for higher education or research and scientific and technical education being in the Union List for which W.A. No. 2388/2019 & batch : 53 : Parliament alone is competent. It is the responsibility of Parliament to ensure that proper standards are maintained in institutions for higher education or research throughout the country and also uniformity in standards is maintained."
31. Apart from the said contentions, learned Standing Counsel for the appellant University submitted that the autonomous st status conferred on some of the colleges have expired on 31 March, 2020 and therefore, the colleges are not entitled to get approval for the new courses/programmes. However, learned th counsel for the colleges has produced a communication dated 20 March, 2020 issued by the University Grants Commission bearing No.F2-119(2)2014AC to the Registrar, University of Calicut by Speed Post, from where it is evident that the University has not forwarded the proposal submitted by the Autonomous College and accordingly, the University was requested to send the NOC/forward the letter regarding the extension of autonomous status to the college for taking further necessary action in the matter. So also, the University has passed an order dated 11/8/2020 bearing UO No.7435/2020/Admn., from where it is clear that the requests made by the Principal of St.Joseph's College, Devagiri, Kozhikode and St.Thomas College, Thrissur for extension of autonomous status were kept pending as they have started new courses without formal W.A. No. 2388/2019 & batch : 54 : affiliation orders from the University. Therefore, we do not find any force in the said contention also, since in accordance with the procedures mandated under the laws discussed above, an autonomous college is vested with powers to seek extension of the autonomous status and the University was duty bound to forward the same to the UGC for appropriate action. Moreover, we find that the colleges have started the courses, since the University has failed to communicate the decision within the time frame prescribed under the provisions of laws discussed above and thus deemed to have secured the approval as is held so by the learned Single Judge in the respective impugned judgments. That apart, once the steps are taken by the colleges for renewal of affiliation on time, the Autonomous status would continue to be in force as per the laws dealt with above. We have also gone through the provisions of the University Grants Commission Act, 1956, an act to make provisions for the co-ordination and determination of standards in Universities. Section 2(f) of Act, 1956 has significant relevance to the issues at hand, since 'University' is defined thereunder to mean a University established or incorporated by or under a Central Act, a Provincial Act or a State Act, and includes any such institution as may, in consultation with the University concerned, be recognized by the Commission in accordance with the regulations made in that behalf W.A. No. 2388/2019 & batch : 55 : under the Act. Section 3 thereto dealing with application of Act to institutions for higher studies other than universities specifies that the Central Government may, on the advice of the Commission, declare by notification in the official gazette, that any institution for higher education, other than a University shall be deemed to be a University for the purposes of the Act, and on such a declaration being made, all the provisions of the act shall apply to such institution as if it were a university within the meaning of clause (f) of section 2. Similarly, Section 12(d) empowers the University Grants Commission to recommend to any University the measures necessary for the improvement of University education and advise the University upon the action to be taken for the purpose of implementing such recommendation; clause (f) thereto empowers the Commission to advise any authority, if such advice is asked for on the establishment of a new university or on proposals connected with the expansion of the activities of any University and clause (j) empowers the Commission to perform such other functions as may be prescribed or as may be deemed necessary by the Commission for advancing the cause of higher education in India or as may be incidental or conducive to the discharge of the functions prescribed in Section 12. Section 14 deals with the consequences of failure of Universities to comply with recommendations of the Commission., W.A. No. 2388/2019 & batch : 56 : which reads thus:
"If any University grants affiliation in respect of any course of study to any college referred to in sub-section (5) of section 12A in contravention of the provisions of that sub-section or fails within a reasonable time to comply with any recommendation made by the Commission under section 12 or contravenes the provision of any rule made under clause (f) or clause (g) or sub-section (2) of section 25, or of any regulation made under clause (e) or clause (f) or clause (g) of section 26, the Commission, after taking into consideration the cause, if any, shown by the University for Such failure or contraventions may withhold the University the grants proposed to be made out of the Fund of the Commission."
32. While section 25 of Act, 1956 deals with power of the Central Government to make rules, section 26 empowers the Commission to make regulations by notification in the official gazette consistent with the provisions of the Act and Rules made thereunder, which inter alia includes the power to make regulations specifying the institutions or class of institutions which may be recognized by the Commission under clause (f) of sub-section (2) of Act, 1956 and for defining the minimum standards of instruction for the grant of any degree by any University and for regulating the maintenance of standards and the co-ordination of work or facilities in Universities. Therefore, on a harmonious reading of these provisions it is clear that the University Grants Commission has superior powers over the Universities and the instructions given by W.A. No. 2388/2019 & batch : 57 : the UGC are binding on the Universities. Even though learned Standing Counsel for the University has submitted that the Regulations, 2018 made by the UGC is not in accordance with law, we are unable to agree to the said proposition for more reasons than one. First of all, University is not entitled to make a collateral challenge to the regulations made by the University, secondly the University did not have any such case before the learned Single Judge, and thirdly we are of the considered opinion that UGC is vested with ample powers under Act, 1956 to make the Regulations in question. The issue with respect to the efficacy and legality of the guidelines issued by the UGC was under consideration of the Apex Court in Praneeth K. and others v. University Grants Commission (UGC ) and others [MANU/SC/0645/2020]and held that the guidelines dated 06.07.2020 has to be treated to have been issued in exercise of statutory powers vested in the Commission under Section 12 of Act, 1956 and therefore, the guidelines issued in exercise of statutory powers cannot be said to be non statutory.
33. Upshot of the above discussion is that the appellants have not made out any case for interference with the judgements of the learned Single Judge in an intra-court appeal under section 5 of the Kerala High Court Act. Needless to say, appeals fail, and W.A. No. 2388/2019 & batch : 58 : accordingly they are dismissed. However we make it clear that the time period prescribed by the learned Single Judge would run from today only.
The documents produced in the writ appeals as well as handed over across the bar at the time of arguments with copy to the other side by the counsel for the respondent colleges are directed to be retained as part of the records of the writ appeals.
All interlocutory applications, if any pending, would stand closed.
sd/-
S. MANIKUMAR, CHIEF JUSTICE.
sd/-
SHAJI P. CHALY, JUDGE.
Rv