Kerala High Court
Unknown vs By Advs. Sri.Joy George on 25 June, 2015
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
FRIDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF APRIL 2018 / 7TH VAISAKHA, 1940
WP(C).No. 14293 of 2018
PETITIONER(S)
M/S. EURO-TECH MARITIME ACADEMY,
KAKKATIKAKARA, KIZHAKKAMBALAM, PAZHANGANADU,
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, MR.JENSON PAUL,
AGED 47 YEARS, S/O. M.P.PAUL, MALIYEKKAL HOUSE, 10 F,
PARTHNAM APARTMENTS, EDAPPALLY, ERNAKULAM.
BY ADVS. SRI.JOY GEORGE
SMT.PRAICY JOSEPH
SMT.TANYA JOY
RESPONDENT(S):
1. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF SHIPPING,
JAHAZ BHAWAN, WALCHAND HIRACHAND MARG, FORT MUMBAI -
400001.
2. ASST. DIRECTOR GENERAL OF SHIPPING [TRAINING]
BETA BUILDING, 9TH FLOOR, I-THINK TECHNO CAMPUS, KANJUR
VILLAGE ROAD, KANJUR MARG (EAST) MUMBAI - 400 042.
3. PRINCIPAL OFFICER,
MERCANTILE MARINE DEPARTMENT, KOCHI - 682 009.
4. UNION OF INDIA,
REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF SHIPPING, NO. 1,
PARLIAMENT STREET, NEW DELHI - 110 001.
R1-R3 BY ADV. SRI.JAISHANKAR V.NAIR, CGC
R4 BY ADV. SRI.N.NAGARESH, ASSISTANT SOLICITOR GENERAL
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27-04-2018,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 14293 of 2018 (J)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER EXHIBITS:-
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ISO 9001/2008 CERTIFICATE DATED
25.06.2015 AWARDED TO THE PETITIONER INSTITUTE.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED 01.08.2017
ISSUED BY RINA WHICH IS VALID UPTO 26.07.2020.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE APPROVAL FOR B-TECH COURSE
DATED 18.06.2012.
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE PROSPECTUS OF THE
M/S.EURO-TECH MARITIME ACADEMY INSTITUTE.
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPUTER PRINTOUT OF THE
COMMUNICATION REGARDING PLACEMENTS DATED
10.04.2018.
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 15.02.2018 ISSUED BY
THE OFFICE OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT AFTER THE
INSPECTION.
EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION EVIDENCING THE
COMPLIANCE OF EXHIBIT P6 DATED 26.03.2018.
EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DATED
04.04.2018 CONTAINING THE PROHIBITORY ORDER OF
TAKING ADMISSION.
EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE EXPLANATION TO EXHIBIT P8
NOTICE DATED 11.04.2018.
EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF GENERAL
GUIDELINES FOR PRE-SEA COURSES, PART V OF
DISCIPLINARY ACTION.
EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 14.06.2017 ISSUED BY
THE MERCHANT NAVY CONSIDERING THE TRAINING OF
PST COURSE.
EXHIBIT P12 TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST DTD. 29.12.2017 TO
MERCHANT NAVY CLUB FOR EXTENDING SWIMMING
POOL FACILITY FOR A FURTHER PERIOD OF 1 YEAR
FROM 01.01.2018 TO 31.12.2018 FOR THE PST COURSE.
EXHIBIT P13 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT SHOWING PAYMENT OF
RENT FOR THE USAGE OF SWIMMING POOL FACILITY
FOR THE MONTH JANUARY DTD. 08.01.2018.
EXHIBIT P13(A) TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT SHOWING PAYMENT OF
RENT FOR THE USAGE OF SWIMMING POOL FACILITY
FOR THE MONTH FEBRUARY DTD. 08.02.2018.
WP(C).No. 14293 of 2018 (J)
EXHIBIT P13(B) TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT SHOWING PAYMENT OF
RENT FOR THE USAGE OF SWIMMING POOL FACILITY
FOR THE MONTH MARCH DTD. 08.03.2018.
EXHIBIT P14 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C) NO. 13998 OF
2018 DATED 17.04.2018.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:- NIL
// TRUE COPY//
PA TO JUDGE
SAM
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, J.
-----------------------------------------------
W.P. (C) No. 14293 of 2018
-----------------------------------------------
Dated this the 27th day of April, 2018
JUDGMENT
The petitioner impugns Ext. P8 show cause notice issued by the Assistant Director General of Shipping (Training), Government of India under which the petitioner has been asked to show cause as to why action should not be taken against them for not providing sufficient facilities to their students. In Ext. P8, it is also further directed that the petitioner shall not take admission for any fresh batch until they show proper cause against the said notice.
2. I have heard Sri. K.P. Dandapani, learned senior counsel assisted by Sri. Joy George, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the Sri. N. Nagaresh, Assistant Solicitor General appearing on behalf of the respondents.
W.P. (C) No. 14293 of 2018-2-
3. Sri. K.P. Dandapani, learned senior counsel submits that the petitioner is engaged in imparting education in several courses and that Ext. P8 show cause notice relates only to two among them. According to him, the conclusions in Ext. P8 is completely untenable because they are based on erroneous factual appreciation. The learned senior counsel further says that the petitioner has shown cause against Ext. P8 by preferring Ext. P9 and that until such time as a decision is taken on Ext. P9, the imposition of a condition in Ext. P8, not to take admission for any fresh batch, is capricious and too harsh.
4. The learned Assistant Solicitor General appearing on behalf of the respondents submits that Ext. P8 has been issued only on the basis of complaints received from the students and according to him, the imposition of a condition not to make any fresh admission is reasonable.
5. I have considered the submission of both sides and I am of the view that it will be better to dispose of this petition directing the W.P. (C) No. 14293 of 2018 -3- 2nd respondent to consider Ext. P9 objections of the petitioner and take a final decision as to the course to be adopted against the petitioner, if required, based on Ext. P8 show cause. This shall be done by the 2nd respondent after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioners, as expeditiously as possible, but not later than 2 months from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment.
6. Until such time a decision is taken by the 2 nd respondent as ordered herein, the condition in Ext. P8 that the petitioner shall not admit any student to the fresh batch of the courses mentioned therein shall stand modified to the extent that the petitioner will be entitled to admit new students but with a specific information being provided to the new students that action as directed herein is pending at the hands of the 2 nd respondent. This information shall be furnished to each new candidate in the form of a letter to to be issued along with their admission letters.
W.P. (C) No. 14293 of 2018-4-
7. It goes without saying that all actions proposed under Ext. P8 will be taken, if required, only after a decision is taken on Ext. P9 as ordered herein.
This writ petition is thus ordered.
Sd/-
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, JUDGE EB/27.04.2018