Kerala High Court
Datatec Computer Engineering College vs Karnataka State Open University on 19 June, 2017
Author: Shaji P. Chaly
Bench: Shaji P.Chaly
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY
MONDAY,THE 19TH DAY OF JUNE 2017/29TH JYAISHTA, 1939
WP(C).No. 12540 of 2017 (N)
----------------------------
PETITIONER :
---------------------
DATATEC COMPUTER ENGINEERING COLLEGE,
PULIMUDE JUNCTION, MAVELIKKARA P.O.,
ALAPPUZHA, PIN-690 101
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR
NIZARUDEEN.J.
BY ADVS.SRI.A.RAJASIMHAN
SRI.K.NIRMALAN
RESPONDENT :
------------------------
KARNATAKA STATE OPEN UNIVERSITY,
MUKTHAGANGOTRI, MYSORE, PIN-570 006
REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR.
BY SRI.P.A.MOHAMMED SHAH,SC
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 19-06-2017,ALONG WITH WP(C).NO.12133 OF 2017 AND CONNECTED
CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
sts
WP(C).No. 12540 of 2017 (N)
---------------------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
---------------------------------------
EXHIBIT P1: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DT. 2.4.2011
EXHIBIT P2: TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION DT. 5.3.2016
EXHIBIT P3: TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION DT. 8.8.2014
EXHIBIT P4: TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC NO.19782/2015 DT.13.12.2016
EXHIBIT P5: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DT. 12.4.2016
EXHIBIT P6: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DT. 23.3.2016
EXHIBIT P7: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DT. 23.3.2016
EXHIBIT P8: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DT. 15.3.2016
EXHIBIT P9: TRUE COPY OF THE TOTAL LIST OF STUDENTS
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: NIL
--------------------------------------------
/TRUE COPY/
P.S.TO JUDGE
sts
SHAJI P. CHALY, J.
-----------------------------------------------
W.P.(C). Nos.12133, 12507, 12516, 12529,
12531, 12535 and 12540 of 2017
-----------------------------------------------
Dated this the 19th day of June, 2017
JUDGMENT
The aforesaid writ petitions are connected materially and substantially in respect of the various diploma and degree courses conducted by the Karnataka State Open University, who is the respondent in all the writ petitions. Petitioners are approved study centers, except the petitioner in W.P.(C) No.12133/2017, who is a collaborator of the respondent University for conducting various diploma courses in Kerala. Therefore, I heard them together and propose to pass a common judgment.
2. Brief facts for the disposal of the writ petitions are as follows; pursuant to the law declared by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Prof.Yeshpal and others v. State of Chattisgarh and another [AIR 2005 SC 20126], the distance education conducted by the universities all over India outside its jurisdiction were directed to be stopped by the UGC. W.P.(C). No.12540 & con. cases 2 Accordingly, as per Ext.P3 notification, respondent University stopped further admission with a cut off date of 2.8.2014. Though the collaborators and institutions complied with the above conditions, the respondent university discontinued the courses illegally. The subject matter was under challenge before this court and Ext.P4 judgment was rendered by this court making the following directions:
i) The petitioners in the above writ petitions shall give the list of students and the courses which they have attended with all particulars, and whose names appear in the list furnished prior to 30.8.2014, to the University within a period of one month from today.
ii) On receipt of the same, University shall make alternate arrangements for the continued study of such candidates and if they have completed the course, arrangements shall be made for such students to write the examinations in any of the recognized colleges in the State of Karnataka.
iii) If it is not possible for the University to continue the course or to permit the students to write the examinations, the University shall compensate such students by paying a sum of W.P.(C). No.12540 & con. cases 3 Rs.3,00,000/- (Rupees three lakhs only) each.
iv) The benefit of the order shall be available only to candidates who are petitioners in any of the above cases."
3. According to the petitioners, the students of the petitioners have completed the courses during the year 2011 to 2014. Admittedly, prior to the issuance of Ext.P3 order by the respondent University dated 8.8.2015, it is stated that, the Academic Council of the respondent University has taken a decision to withdraw Gate Course, Bridge Course, Degree Bridge Courses, In-house programmes of the University and all types of Technical and Para-Medical programmes operated by the Academic Council of the respondent University. It is also stated, if admissions have been carried out for the above mentioned programmes from collaborative institutions till 2.8.2014, related details of course wise students list should be sent to Registrar (Admission) of the respondent University within 30.8.2014. It is further stipulated that, Academic Collaborative Institutions fail to follow the instruction, then W.P.(C). No.12540 & con. cases 4 the university cannot be held responsible for any consequences. However, evident from Ext.P4 judgment, this court upheld the rights of those students, who were pursuing their studies on the cut off date of 2.8.2014 and directed the University to either complete the course or to pay compensation.
4. The paramount grievance advanced by the petitioners in these writ petitions is that, now the University is not issuing diploma certificate including provisional and final, migration and transfer certificate to the students who have already completed and passed the decree and diploma courses.
5. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent University and perused the pleadings and the documents on record.
6. Learned counsel for petitioners reiterated the contentions raised in the writ petitions. However, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the University submitted that, W.P.(C). No.12540 & con. cases 5 in view of the imperative direction issued by the UGC on the basis of the judgment rendered by the Apex Court in Prof.Yeshpal and others (supra), the University is bound to follow the directives of the UGC. The UGC has directed the University that, the agreements executed after the judgment rendered to above, by the University with Collaborators and study centers are all illegal and against the directives contained in the aforesaid judgment. Therefore, the University is unable to issue the certificates as is sought for by the petitioners in the writ petitions.
7. Having evaluated the situations and summersing the issue raised by the petitioners, I think the issue is squarely covered by Ext.P4 judgment in W.P.(C) No.12540/2017. Petitioners are also entitled to get the similar treatment at the hands of the University especially due to the fact that, the students under the petitioners in these writ petitions have all completed the courses during the year 2011 to 2014 and the only thing remains to be carried out by the respondent W.P.(C). No.12540 & con. cases 6 University is, issuance of necessary certificate to the petitioners.
8. Reckoning all these facts and circumstances, there will be a direction to the respondent University to issue necessary certificates to the students, who have prosecuted the distance education programme through the petitioners at the earliest possible time, and at any rate within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
Writ petitions are allowed accordingly.
Sd/-
SHAJI P. CHALY JUDGE smv 20.6.2017