Karnataka High Court
Nagabhushan S. Dodamani vs The Vice Chancellor on 15 December, 2017
1
W.P.NO.112146/2017
C/w.W.P.NO.112147/2017
W.P.NO.112148/2017
W.P.NO.112160/2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BEN CH
DATED THIS THE 15 T H DAY OF DECEMBER 2017
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MRS . J USTICE K.S .MUDAGAL
WRIT PETITION N O. 112146/ 2017 ( EDN-EX)
C/W.
WRIT PETITION N O. 112147/ 2017 ( EDN-EX)
WRIT PETITION N O. 112148/ 2017 ( EDN-EX)
WRIT PETITION N O. 112160/ 2017 ( EDN-EX)
IN W.P.NO.112146/2017
BETWEEN:
NAGABHUSHAN S . DODAMANI
AGE: 27 YEARS , OCC. STUDENT
R/O LIN G ROAD
CHALUKYA ANGAR, BIJAPUR
PRESENTLY R/O N.S. MUTTAGI
GROUP-B, PLOT N O.2
HANUMANTH NAGA R
KRISHNA TEMPLE, DHARWAD
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI CHANDRA SHEKHAR R HIREM ATH, ADV OCATE.)
AND:
1. THE VICE CHANCELLOR
VISVESSCARAYYA TECHNOLOGI CL
UNIVERSITY
"JNANA SANGAM", BELA GAVI
2
W.P.NO.112146/2017
C/w.W.P.NO.112147/2017
W.P.NO.112148/2017
W.P.NO.112160/2017
2. THE REGISTRAR (EVALUATION)
VISVESSCARAYYA TECHNOLOCL
UNIVERSITY
"JNANA SANGAM", BELA GAVI
3. THE PRINCIPA L
SECAB INSTITUTE OF EN GINEERING
AND TECHN OLOGY
NAURASPUR BA GA LKOT ROAD
VIJAYPUR (BIJA PUR)-586109
... RES PONDENTS
(BY SRI ANOOP G. DESHPANDE, ADV OCATE, F OR
RESPOND ENTS NO.1 AND R.2;
R.3 - N OTICE DIS PENSED WITH.)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FI LED UNDER ARTICLES 226 &
227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO:
A) QUASH THE REF .NO.VTU/BGM/REG( E)/PS/2017-
2018/ 2314 DATED 01.12.2017, IS SUED BY THE SECOND
RESPOND ENT UNIVERSITY, THE COPY OF THE SAME IS
PROD UCED HEREW ITH AT ANNEXURE-A;
B) DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS NO.2 AND 3 TO
ISSUE A HALL TI CKET AND PERMI T THE PETITIONER TO
APPEAR FOR THE TWO EXAMINATIONS OF "QUANTI TATIVE
METHODS-I" AND "QUANTITATIVE METHODS-II" IN MBA
COURS E WHICH ARE SCHEDULED ON 19.12.2017 AND
20.12.2017 RESPECTIVELY IN VIEW OF THE CIRCULAR
ISSUED BY THE RESPOND ENT NO.2 IN VTU/BGM/REG( E)/PS/
2017- 2018/2236 DATED 21.11.2017 COPY OF THE TIME
TABLE IS PRODUCED HEREWITH AT ANNEXURE-B, ETC.,.
3
W.P.NO.112146/2017
C/w.W.P.NO.112147/2017
W.P.NO.112148/2017
W.P.NO.112160/2017
IN W.P.NO.112147/2017
BETWEEN:
MAHAMMAD IQBAL NADAF
AGE:27 Y EARS, OCC. STUDENT
R/O LIN G ROAD
CHALUKYA NAGAR, BIJAPUR
PRESENTLY R/O N.S. MUTTAGI
GROUND-B, PLOT NO.2
HANUMANTH NAGA R
KRISHNA TEMPLE, DHARWAD
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI CHANDRA SHEKHAR R HIREM ATH, ADV OCATE.)
AND:
1. THE VICE CHANCELLOR
VISVESSCARAYYA TECHNOLOGI CAL
UNIVERSITY
"JNANA SANGAM", BELA GAVI
2. THE REGISTRAR (EVALUATION)
VISVESSCARAYYA TECHNOLOCL
UNIVERSITY
"JNANA SANGAM", BELA GAVI
3. THE PRINCIPA L
SECAB INSTITUTE OF EN GINEERING
AND TECHN OLOGY
NAURASPUR BA GA LKOT ROAD
VIJAYPUR(BIJAPUR)-586109
... RES PONDENTS
(BY SRI ANOOP G. DESHPANDE, ADV OCATE, F OR
RESPOND ENTS NO.1 AND R.2;
R.3 - N OTICE DIS PENSED WITH.)
4
W.P.NO.112146/2017
C/w.W.P.NO.112147/2017
W.P.NO.112148/2017
W.P.NO.112160/2017
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FI LED UNDER ARTICLES 226 &
227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO:
A) QUASH THE REF .NO.VTU/BGM/REG( E)/PS/2017-
2018/ 2314 DATED 01.12.2017, IS SUED BY THE SECOND
RESPOND ENT UNIVERSITY, THE COPY OF THE SAME IS
PROD UCED HEREW ITH AT ANNEXURE-A;
B) DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS NO.2 AND 3 TO
ISSUE A HALL TI CKET AND PERMI T THE PETITIONER TO
APPEAR FOR THE EXAMINATION OF "QUANTITATIVE
METHODS-I" SUBJECT IN MBA COURSE WHI CH IS
SCHEDULED ON 20.12.2017 IN V IEW OF THE CIRCULAR
ISSUED BY THE RES PONDENT NO.2 IN
VTU/BGM/REG(E)/ PS/2017- 2018/ 2236 DATED 21.11.2017
COPY OF THE TI ME TABLE IS PRODUCED HEREWI TH AT
ANNEXURE-B, ETC.,.
IN W.P.NO.112148/2017
BETWEEN:
RAVIRAJ NAGARAJ HALIMANI
AGE:27 Y EARS, OCC. STUDENT
R/O LIN G ROAD
CHALUKYA NAGAR, BIJAPUR
PRESENTLY R/O N.S. MUTTAGI
GROUP-B, PLOT N O.2
HANUMANTH NAGA R
KRISHNA TEMPLE, DHARWAD
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI CHANDRA SHEKHAR R HIREM ATH, ADV OCATE.)
5
W.P.NO.112146/2017
C/w.W.P.NO.112147/2017
W.P.NO.112148/2017
W.P.NO.112160/2017
AND:
1. THE VICE CHANCELLOR
VISVESSCARAYYA TECHNOLOGI CL
UNIVERSITY
"JNANA SANGAM", BELA GAVI
2. THE REGISTRAR (EVALUATION)
VISVESSCARAYYA TECHNOLOCL
UNIVERSITY
"JNANA SANGAM", BELA GAVI
3. THE PRINCIPA L
SECAB INSTITUTE OF EN GINEERING
AND TECHN OLOGY
NAURASPUR BA GA LKOT ROAD
VIJAYPUR(BIJAPUR)-586109
... RES PONDENTS
(BY SRI ANOOP G. DESHPANDE, ADV OCATE, F OR
RESPOND ENTS NO.1 AND R.2;
R.3 - N OTICE DIS PENSED WITH.)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FI LED UNDER ARTICLES 226 &
227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO:
A) QUASH THE REF .NO.VTU/BGM/REG( E)/PS/2017-
2018/ 2314 DATED 01.12.2017, IS SUED BY THE SECOND
RESPOND ENT UNIVERSITY, THE COPY OF THE SAME IS
PROD UCED HEREW ITH AT ANNEXURE-A;
B) DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS NO.2 AND 3 TO
ISSUE A HALL TI CKET AND PERMI T THE PETITIONER TO
APPEAR FOR THE EXAMINATION OF "STATISTICS FOR
6
W.P.NO.112146/2017
C/w.W.P.NO.112147/2017
W.P.NO.112148/2017
W.P.NO.112160/2017
MANAGEMENT" SUBJECT IN MBA COURSE W HICH IS
SCHEDULED ON 19.12.2017 IN V IEW OF THE CIRCULAR
ISSUED BY THE RES PONDENT NO.2 IN
VTU/BGM/REG(E)/ PS/2017- 2018/ 2236 DATED 21.11.2017
COPY OF THE TI ME TABLE IS PRODUCED HEREWI TH AT
ANNEXURE-B, ETC.,.
IN W.P.NO.112160/2017
BETWEEN:
SACHIN S/O ARAV IND PATIL
AGE: 27 YEARS , OCC: STUD ENT,
R/O: H.NO.36,
CHOUGALA ONI , K OCHARI ,
BELAGAVI- 591340.
... PETITIONER
(BY SRI DINESH M KULKARNI , ADV OCATE.)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REP. BY ITS SECRETARY TO
TECHNICAL AND HIGHER EDUCATION ,
VIDHANA SOUDHA , BENGALURU- 560001.
2. VISVESVARAYA TECHNOLOGI CAL
UNIVERSITY,
"JNANA SANGAMA", BELA GAVI-590018,
REP. BY ITS REGIS TRAR.
3. JAIN COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING
T.S. NAGAR, HUNCHANHATTI ROAD ,
7
W.P.NO.112146/2017
C/w.W.P.NO.112147/2017
W.P.NO.112148/2017
W.P.NO.112160/2017
MACHHE, BELAGAV I-590014,
REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL.
... RES PONDENTS
(BY SMT.VEENA HEGDE, ADD L. GOV ERNMENT ADVOCA TE,
FOR R.1;
SRI ANOOP G. D ES HPANDE, ADV OCA TE, F OR R.2;
R.3 - N OTICE DIS PENSED WITH.)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FI LED UNDER ARTICLES 226 &
227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO:
A) QUASH THE CIRCULAR ANNEXURE-G BEARIN G
NO.REF .N O.VT U/BGM/REG/(E)/ PS/2017- 18/ 2314 DATED
01.12.2017 ISSUED BY RESPONDEN T NO.2 AS NULL AND
VOID IN S O FAR A S PETITION ER IS CONCERN ED;
B) DIRECT THE 2 N D RESPOND ENT TO HOLD THAT
PETITIONER IS ELIGIBLE TO APPEA R FOR EXAMINATION OF
SUBJECT "MANAGEMENT ACCOUNTING AND CONTROL
SYSTEM" (10 MBA 32) OF 3 R D SEMES TER MBA, ETC.,.
THESE WRIT PETIT IONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DA Y, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWIN G:
ORDER
In W.P.No.112160/2017 Smt.Veena Hegde, the learned Addl. Government Advocate accepts notice for respondent No.1 and Sri Anoop Deshpande, the 8 W.P.NO.112146/2017 C/w.W.P.NO.112147/2017 W.P.NO.112148/2017 W.P.NO.112160/2017 learned standing counsel takes notice for the 2 n d respondent. Notice to respondent No.3 is dispensed with.
2. In W.P.Nos.112146/2017, 112147/2017 and 112148/2017, Sri Anoop Deshpande, the learned standing counsel takes notice for respondents No.1 and 2. Notice to respondent No.3 is dispensed with.
3. Heard.
4. The petitioners in the above cases were admitted to first year MBA course during the following academic year.
In W.P.No.112146/2017 2011-12 In W.P.No.112147/2017 2012-13 In W.P.No.112148/2017 2011-12 In W.P.No.112160/2017 2011-12
The duration of the said course was two years. They were supposed to complete the course within two 9 W.P.NO.112146/2017 C/w.W.P.NO.112147/2017 W.P.NO.112148/2017 W.P.NO.112160/2017 years. However they did not clear all the subjects. The university has granted them two years extension to clear the failed subjects under notification dated 27.10.2016, by virtue of resolution passed in its executive council's meeting dated 14.10.2016. That was 'a special one time measure'. As per the said notification the students admitted to MBA course during 2009-10 to 2012-13 are permitted to take up the supplementary exams till July 2017. Therefore the petitioners at the maximum were entitled to take supplementary exams up to July 2017. They have not passed the exams held even in July 2017.
5. The university has issued circular dated 1.12.2017 to all the colleges affiliated to it directing the colleges not to allow the students covered under Table No.2 of the notification dated 27.10.2016 to take up the MBA exams scheduled to be held in December 2017/January 2018. The petitioners 10 W.P.NO.112146/2017 C/w.W.P.NO.112147/2017 W.P.NO.112148/2017 W.P.NO.112160/2017 challenge the said circular and notification on the following grounds:
(i) The colleges have accepted the examination registration fees. Therefore now the university cannot exclude them.
(ii) The petitioners are left with only one subject and barring them from taking examination spoils their career.
(iii) The restriction in the notification dated 27.10.2016 applies only to the admission to the final year MBA course and not for taking examinations.
6. Sri Anoop Deshpande, the learned counsel for the university opposes the petitions on the following grounds:
(i) The petitioner pursued the two years course for more than four years taking the benefit of very same notification.
Therefore they are estopped from challenging the said notification; 11 W.P.NO.112146/2017 C/w.W.P.NO.112147/2017 W.P.NO.112148/2017 W.P.NO.112160/2017
(ii) The Courts cannot interfere in the academic administration of the university.
7. The interpretation of the notification dated 27.10.2016 that the restriction mentioned in Table No.2 of the paragraph dealing with the relaxation for maximum duration for post graduate course applies only for admission to the final year MBA course is apparently misconception and incorrect.
8. Perusal of the said condition shows that only the candidates who are eligible for admission to the final year MBA course would be entitled for the benefit of said relaxation.
9. As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the university, the petitioners have pursued two years course for more than four years taking benefit of the very same notification dated 27.10.2016. Therefore they are estopped from 12 W.P.NO.112146/2017 C/w.W.P.NO.112147/2017 W.P.NO.112148/2017 W.P.NO.112160/2017 challenging the wisdom of the said notification at this point of time.
10. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in in Central Board of Secondary Education through Secretary, All India Pre-Medical/Pre-Dental Entrance Examination and others vs. Khushboo Shrivastava and others, referring to the earlier judgment of the Supreme Court in Maharashtra State Board of Secondary and Higher Secondary Education vs. Paritosh Bhupeshkumar Sheth (1984) 4 SCC 27, held that Courts shall generally not interfere in academic policy of the university. Paragraph No.11 of the judgment reads as follows:
11. In our considered opinion, neither the learned Single Judge nor the Division Bench of the High Court could have substituted his/its own views for that of the examiners and awarded two additional marks to Respondent 1 for the two answers in exercise of powers of judicial review 13 W.P.NO.112146/2017 C/w.W.P.NO.112147/2017 W.P.NO.112148/2017 W.P.NO.112160/2017 under Article 226 of the Constitution as these are purely academic matters. This Court in Maharashtra State Board of Secondary and Higher Secondary Education v. Paritosh Bhupeshkumar Sheth has observed:
"29. ...As has been repeatedly pointed out by this Court, the court should be extremely reluctant to substitute its own views as to what is wise, prudent and proper in relation to academic matters in preference to those formulated by professional men possessing technical expertise and rich experience of actual day-to-day working of educational institutions and the departments controlling them. It will be wholly wrong for the court to make a pedantic and purely idealistic approach to the problems of this nature, isolated from the actual realities and grassroots problems involved in the working of the system and unmindful of the consequences which would emanate if a purely idealistic view as opposed to a pragmatic one were to be propounded."
(Emphasis supplied.) 14 W.P.NO.112146/2017 C/w.W.P.NO.112147/2017 W.P.NO.112148/2017 W.P.NO.112160/2017
11. Further, this Court in Sri Amrit Raj V. Vs. Registrar, VTU and connected matters on 24.3.2016 has upheld the regulation making power of the university. By the regulation framed by the university the notification in question is issued.
12. So far as collection of the registration fees of the examination, it is the colleges which have collected the examination fees and not the university. Therefore collection of the registration fees of the examination by the colleges does not entail any liability or estoppel for the university. There are no grounds to interfere in the matters. Therefore the petitions are dismissed.
Sd/-
JUDGE Mrk/-