Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

P.Deepu vs The Mahatma Gandhi University on 11 May, 2016

Author: A.M. Shaffique

Bench: A.M.Shaffique

        

 
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                            PRESENT:

                         THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE

        TUESDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2016/22ND AGRAHAYANA, 1938

                                   WP(C).No. 26797 of 2016 (Y)
                                      ----------------------------


PETITIONER(S):
-----------------------

                     P.DEEPU,
                    "DEEPTHY", MAYITHARA P.O.,
                    CHERTHALA- 688 539.


                     BY SRI.KURIAN GEORGE KANNANTHANAM, SENIOR ADVOCATE.
                          ADVS. SRI.TONY GEORGE KANNANTHANAM,
                                SRI.THOMAS GEORGE.

RESPONDENT(S):
-------------------------

        1.           THE MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY,
                     REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR,
                     PRIYADARSHINI HILLS, KOTTAYAM- 686 660.

        2.           THE REGISTRAR,
                     MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY,
                     PRIYADARSHINI HILLS, KOTTAYAM- 686 660.


                    BY ADV. SRI.ASOK M. CHERIAN, SC.


                    THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
                    ON 13-12-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
                    FOLLOWING:

rs.

WP(C).No. 26797 of 2016 (Y)

                                APPENDIX

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:-


EXHIBIT P1   TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE COLLEGE
            EVIDENCING PETITIONER SUCCESSFUL PASS IN P.G.D.M.

EXHIBIT P2  TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 11-05-2016 FROM THE
            UNIVERSITY TO THE PETITIONER .

EXHIBIT P3  TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION DATED 07-09-2011 ISSUED
            FROM THE M.G. UNIVERSITY.

EXHIBIT P4  TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 22-11-2013
            ISSUED BY THE ASSOCIATION OF INDIAN UNIVERSITIES.

EXHIBIT P5  TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 22-01-2015 TO THE
            PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER, M.G. UNIVERSITY.

EXHIBIT P6  TRUE COPY OF THE REPLYDATED 12-02-2015 ISSUED BY THE
            M.G. UNIVERSITY.

EXHIBIT P7  TRUE COPY OF THE U.G.C. REGULATIONS 2010 PAGES 15 TO 19.

EXHIBIT P8  TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 13-02-2015 ISSUED FROM
            THE UNIVERSITY.

EXHIBIT P9  TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 29-04-2016 ISSUED BY
            ALL INDIA COUNCIL FOR TECHNICAL EDUCATION.


RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:-       NIL.




                                               //TRUE COPY//


                                               P.S.TO JUDGE


rs.



                        A.M. SHAFFIQUE, J.
                       ===============
                      W.P. (C) No. 26797 of 2016
                    ==================

              Dated this, the 13th day of December, 2016


                           J U D G M E N T

Petitioner had approached this Court seeking for a direction to the University to issue an equivalency certificate to the petitioner treating the Post Graduate Diploma in Management (PGDM) of the petitioner as equivalent to MBA of the Mahatma Gandhi University for the purpose of appointment and also challenges Ext.P2 by which his request had been rejected on the ground that the course of study undertaken by the candidate has not been recognised by the University and therefore equivalency certificate cannot be granted.

2. Petitioner submits that petitioner had undertaken the aforesaid course from a College affiliated to the University. However, it was not a course which is recognised by the University and no affiliation was taken from the University, it being a diploma course. However, it is submitted that the Association of Indian Universities (AIU), AICTE and the UGC had approved the course as equivalent to Master of Business Administration (MBA). Petitioner also submits that University had published a notification to the post of Assistant W.P(C) No.26797/16 -:2:- Professor in which PGDM course declared as equivalent by the Association of Indian Universities or accredited by AICTE/UGC is considered to be valid qualification. Even as per th UGC guidelines, PGDM is considered to be equivalent to MBA course for the purpose of appointment to the post of Assistant Professor. Ext.P4 is the certificate issued by the Association of Indian Universities in this regard on 22/11/2013. Further, petitioner relies upon Ext.P6, an answer obtained under the Right to Information Act wherein the University itself had informed that the PGDM course undertaken by the petitioner is equivalent to MBA. However, it is submitted that the University while considering the application for equivalency rejected the same on the ground that the course of study undertaken by the candidate has not been recognized by the University.

3. A statement has been filed by the standing counsel inter alia stating that it is for the Academic Council of the University to decide whether any examination can be accepted as equivalent to those of M.G.University. However Section 25(xii) of the M.G.University Act empowers the Academic Council to decide W.P(C) No.26797/16 -:3:- equivalency of an examination with that of M.G.University. In so far as M.G.University is not conducting any PGDM course, it cannot be considered for equivalency with MBA examination conducted by the M.G.University.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel appearing for the respondent University.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the only requirement of the petitioner is to apply for a teaching post as Assistant Professor in a College other than under the University. When the University itself has recognised PGDM course approved by AIU/AICTE and UGC as a valid qualification equivalent to MBA, there is no reason why a similar view should not be taken as far as the petitioner is concerned.

6. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the University submits that Section 25(xii) of the M.G.University Act does not permit the University to grant equivalence. Section 25

(xii) reads as under:-

"25(xii) to decide what examinations of other Universities may be accepted as equivalent to those of the University and to negotiate with other W.P(C) No.26797/16 -:4:- Universities for the recognition of the examinations of the University."

There cannot be any dispute regarding the manner in which Academic Council of the University is to consider equivalency of a particular course with that of another course conducted by another University. However, since the request of the petitioner is very limited, in so far as the claim is only for submitting an application for appointment to the post of teacher, it is open for the University to consider whether the said course can be recognized for the purpose of appointment to the post of Assistant Professor.

Under such circumstances, I am of the view that the matter requires reconsideration and accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of as under:-

(i) Ext.P2 is set aside.
(ii) Petitioner shall file a fresh application seeking for recognition of the course for the purpose of appointment to the post of Assistant Professor which shall be considered by the Academic Council in accordance with the procedure prescribed W.P(C) No.26797/16 -:5:- within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of the representation.

Sd/-

A.M. SHAFFIQUE, JUDGE Rp13/12/2016 //True Copy// P.S to Judge