The central legal point established in the judgment is the protection of the rights of management in educational institutions under Art.19(1)(f) and Art.30(1) of the Constitution, and the importance of preserving the autonomy of such institutions.

1. In V. Rev. Mother Provincial v. State of Kerala (1969 KLT. 749), a Full Bench of this Court struck down, inter alia, sub-ss. (1), (2), (3) and (9) of S.53 and sub-sections (2) and (4) of S.56 of the Kerala University Act, 1969, since the said provisions were bad for offending Art.19(1)(f) and 30 (1) of the Constitution. And the Supreme Court upheld this in State of Kerala v. Very Rev. Mother Provincial (1970 KLT. 630). There was a contention before the Supreme Court by the majority institutions that there was discrimination against them and is favour of the minority institutions under Art.14 of the Constitution. But, since the counsel of the Kerala State submitted that he had instructions to state that any provision held inapplicable to minority institutions would not be enforced against majority institutions also, the Supreme Court did not consider that question. The State filed a review petition (R.P. No. 45 of 1970) to review the judgment of the Supreme Court; and the Supreme Court observed:

"There appears to be some misunderstanding of the arguments, because we did not consider the vires of sub-sections (1), (2), (3) and (9) of S.53 and sub sections (2) and (4) of S.56 vis-a-vis Art.30(1) of the Constitution. We express no opinion in relation to these sub sections vis-a-vis Art.30(1)."

(This is sought to be used by the State to contend that the Supreme Court did not express any opinion regarding the vires of the aforesaid subsections under Art.30 (1) of the Constitution. Though the Supreme Court observed that they agreed with the High Court that sub-sections (1), (2), (3) and (9) of S.53 and sub-sections (2) and (4) of S.56 were ultra vires, this has to be understood in the light of their aforesaid observation in the order in the review petition this is the content ton of the State. However, it cannot be disputed that the Full Bench of this Court held the sub-sections unconstitutional not only under Art.19(1)(f) but also under Art.30(1); and that was not set aside by the Supreme Court. The said decision is binding on us: and, for ourselves, we fail to see how, if the said sub-sections were bad for offending Art.19(1)(f), they would not offend Art.30(1) too.)

2. After the decision of the Supreme Court, it became necessary to amend the Kerala University Act; and for that purpose, the Kerala University (Amendment) Act of 1971 was passed, which received the assent of the Governor on 21st May 1971. Amendments were made to fill the lacuna caused by the striking down of some of the provisions of the parent Act; and the amendments were to be deemed to have come into force on 10th December 1970. In this writ petition, the prayer is to declare S.5, 7 and 8 of the amending Act as void and unconstitutional, being in violation of Art.19 (1) (f) and 30 (1) of the Constitution. (Though the prayer was to quash the said provisions of the Ordinance which preceded the Act; the prayer was amended into one for quashing the corresponding provisions of the Act after the Ordinance was replaced by the Act.) S.5 and 7 of the amending Act amend S.53 and 56 of the parent Act and S.8 inserts a tew section, S.59A, providing for the constitution of an Appellate Tribunal.

Sub-sections (1) to (3) of S.53 made provision for the appointment of Principals of private colleges; and sub-section (2) provided that appointment to the post of Principal should be made from among teachers of the college or of all the colleges under the same management, as the the case might be, or, if there was no suitable person in such college or colleges, from other persons. Subsection (3) provided that such appointment should be made having regard to seniority and merit and should be subject to the approval of the Syndicate. The amended sub-section (1) provides that Principals of private colleges shall possess such qualifications as may be prescribed by Regulations. Sub-section (2) reads.

"A vacancy in the post of Principal shall be filled op by the educational agency o