Back
1985 Supreme(Kar) 142
Karnataka High Court
Judges : Doddakale Gowda
NARAYANASWAMY - Appellant
Versus
DIRECTOR OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION - Respondent
W. P. 286 Of 1985
Decided On : 04/04/1985
The lack of effective communication of transfer orders and the deprivation of admission without sufficient time opposed the principles of natural justice, leading to the success of the Writ Petition.
Headnote:
Admission - Forfeiture of Admission - Principles of Natural Justice - [Admission] - [Engineering Degree Course] - [Not specified] - The court discussed the forfeiture of admission, the knowledge of transfer, and the principles of natural justice. It highlighted the lack of effective communication of the transfer order and the deprivation of admission without sufficient time, opposing the principles of natural justice.
Fact of the Case:
Petitioner was selected and assigned to study Mechanical Engineering at B. M. S. College of Engineering but was later transferred to University Visveswaraya College of Engineering without effective communication. The petitioner's admission was subsequently forfeited, and he was denied admission to the latter college.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner had no knowledge of the transfer order and was deprived of admission without sufficient time, opposing the principles of natural justice. The court also criticized the inaction of the authorities in remedying the petitioner's grievance.
Issues: The issues involved the knowledge of transfer, forfeiture of admission, and the application of principles of natural justice in the admission process.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the lack of effective communication of the transfer order and the deprivation of admission without sufficient time opposed the principles of natural justice, leading to the success of the Writ Petition.
Final Decision: A Writ in the nature of Mandamus was issued directing the respondents to admit the petitioner to University Visveswaraya College of Engineering forthwith, and costs were imposed on the first Respondent.
( 1 ) IN the process of selection of students for admission to Engineering Degree Course for the academic year 1984-85, petitioner was selected and assigned to B. M. S. College of Engineering, bangalore, to study Mechanical Engineering, and in fact joined the College on 22nd September, 1984 remitting necessary fees. Request made for change of subject from Mechanical to Civil engineering at the time of admis-sion appears to have been forwarded to Director of Technical education, who is the Chairman of the Selection Committee. Immediately, College was closed for Dasara Vacation and as usual, as a student hailing from moffusil went to his village during vacation. On re-opening of the College, when went to attend classes, he was informed by the college authorities that his admission to B. E. degree course in B. M. S. College of Engineering has been cancelled and assigned to University Visveswaraya College of Engineering, Bangalore. Accordingly, when went to join the University Visveswaraiah College of Engineering, he has been informed that last date fixed for admission. e. , 27-10-1984 having expired, not possible to admit him. As a result, he is in neither B. M. S. College of Engineering, nor University visheswaraya College of Engineering, Bangalore. Right of admission secured has been lost. Contention of petitioner is that forfeiture of admission is based on irrelevant grounds for which he can-not be held responsible and a mandamus be issued to admit him to B. E. degree course of 1984-85 so that he can prosecute his studies.
( 2 ) SUBMISSION of Sri Mohandas N. Hegde, Learned Counsel for petitioner, is that some seats in university Visveswaraya College of Engineering are still vacant. Miss. Vinutha N. Reddy and miss, Uma Maheshwari have been admitted to the college in the month of December, 1984 and admission denied to petitioner on the ground that last date fixed for admission has expired without giving due intimation of variation has infringed his fundamental right guaranteed under constitution.
( 3 ) PER contra, Sri S. V. Narasimhan, Learned Government Pleader submitted that no candidate has been admitted after the expiry of last date fixed for admission. First modified list was published on 540-1984 in all Notice Boards of Engineering Colleges fixing 9-10-1984 as the last date for admission. Petitioner's transfer was notified in the notice board of the Director of technical Education as well as in notice board of the college. If petitioner has not verified the change, from notice affixed in notice board, authorities cannot be held responsible for his lapses and he alone must think his stars. Sri Narasimhan further submitted on instructions from Director of Technical Education that he has requested Registrar of the University to secure necessary material from principal of university as to whether any candidate/s has/ have been admitted in December, 1984 including persons referred to above and also regarding vacancy position as he is not under his control and to defer hearing till then.
( 4 ) ORDER sheet of this case establishes that this case has been adjourned about twenty times on one ground or the other. Apart from intervention of summer holidays for Courts, academic year is coming to an end. It only be-speaks of seriousness and care respondents look at human being involved. The way in which hearing is prolonged gives an impression that respondents intend to avoid decision on this issue or to deprive petitioner relief on the pretext that academic year has already expired. This only shows the respect or regard Director has got towards law and machinery administering justice. Judicial consciousness will not encourage such tactics. After all university Visveswaraya College of Engineering is not faraway from the office of the Director of Technical Education and it is just opposite to his office. Assuming that the Principal of the university Visveswaraya College of Engineering is not under his control, an
