P.R. Ramachandra Menon, J.

The petitioners are students pursuing the MBA course in the 4th respondent College, under the NRI quota. They are before this Court challenging Ext.P12 order passed by the first respondent/Admission Supervisory Committee (ASC in short), in so far as approval of Admission has been turned down holding that they were not duly qualified to have obtained Admission. The petitioners also challenge Ext.P8 order dated 07.06.2016 passed by the ASC, stipulating that no entrance examination conducted by non-governmental agencies shall be accepted for admission to MBA course except KMAT (Kerala) (conducted by the Universities in Kerala, under the supervision of the ASC), CAT (conducted by the Indian Institute of Management) and CMAT (conducted by the AICTE) and that MAT Score (conducted by All India Management Association) shall not be accepted for MBA admission after May, 2016. The petitioners seek for a declaration that they are entitled to continue the study.

2. The 4th respondent Institution, who is running an MBA course is stated as having approval of the AICTE vide Ext.P3. The said Institution is affiliated to the third respondent/University, who has issued Ext.P2 Regulations for MBA (2016). The 4th respondent Institution had published Ext.P1 Prospectus for MBA. The petitioners took part in the test and interview conducted by the Educational Institution, pursuant to which they were offered seats for the said course in the NRI quota in month of July, 2016. It is stated that they have satisfied the fees and are pursuing the studies accordingly. It is also stated that their admissions were approved by the third respondent/University, as disclosed from the Student Details Report published by the third respondent, vide Ext.P4. In the course of time, the petitioners appeared for the first semester MBA examinations as well. A copy of the first semester results has been produced as Ext.P5. Incidentally, it is pointed out that they had participated in the Management Aptitude Test (MAT) conducted by All India Management Association (AIMA) in September, 2016. Copies of the MAT score secured by them have been produced as Exts.P6 and P7 respectively.

3. As per Ext.P11 (a) letter dated 20.10.2016, the 4th respondent Institution requested the first respondent/Committee to approve the admission of the petitioners and others concerned. After considering the request, the first respondent, vide Ext.P12 approved the admission of only 31' students and rejected the candidature of 10' students including the petitioners, holding that they were not qualified. This is sought to be challenged in this writ petition along with the challenge raised against Ext.P8 proceedings of the ASC dated 07.06.2016 holding no Entrance Examination conducted by the Non-Governmental Agencies shall be accepted for admission to MBA Course, except KMAT, CAT and CMAT and further that MAT score (in the examinations conducted by AIMA shall not be accepted after May 2016.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the different learned Standing Counsel for the respondents 1 to 3.

5. Mr. Jacob Alex, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the challenge is mainly two fold. Firstly, it is contended that the first respondent does not have any power, jurisdiction or competence to have issued Ext.P8/P12 ; more so when the admission of the petitioners was already approved by the University as disclosed from the particulars published by them vide Ext.P4. It is further contended that the petitioners are belonging to NRI category, who stand on a different footing and by virtue of settled law on the subject, particularly the verdict passed by a Division Bench of this Court in W.P(C) 14708 of 2012 (dated 18.12.2012) it is not all necessary for the NRI candidates to clear any eligibility test for getting admissions for the professional courses. As such, they form a different class to have been dealt with separately, which aspect was omi