SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Ker) 3201

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
ANIL K.NARENDRAN, MURALEE KRISHNA S., JJ.
The Principal, Dr. Somervell Memorial Csi Medical College Allied Health Sciences Karakonam, Thiruvananthapuram - Appellant
Vs.
State Of Kerala - Respondent
WA No. 2289 of 2025
Decided On : 10-12-2025

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Sri.Arun.B.Varghese, Shri.Alan Lalu John, Sri.S.Sreekumar (SR.)
For the Respondent: Shri.S.Ganesh, Shri.P.Sreekumar (SR.), Smt.Nisha Bose, Senior Government Pleader

Statutory interpretation requires that conditions for new course approvals be reasonable, ensuring they uphold educational standards without being unworkable.

Headnote:(A) Kerala High Court Act, 1958 - Writ appeal under Section 5(I) challenging the rejection of applications for starting additional courses in a medical college based on insufficient pass percentage of existing courses - The Statute requires the minimum average pass percentage for affiliations, and the rejection was based on valid statutes. (Paras 2.1-22)

(B) Educational Law - Statutory interpretation - The requirement of pass percentage for new courses being unreasonable when applied to institutions with no existing course under the same stream was addressed, establishing a purposive interpretation since the object is to maintain educational standards. (Paras 2.16-22)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner, a medical college, applied to start new para-medical courses after receiving a No Objection Certificate from the government, but the University rejected the application citing inadequate pass percentages from existing courses. The legitimacy of the underlying statutes was challenged based on procedural inadequacies regarding publication.

Findings of Court:
The court dismissed the appeal, affirming that the reasoning for rejection adhered to legitimate regulatory requirements and that the impacted college should meet specified performance standards prior to establishing additional programs.

Issues: Whether the rejection of the petitioner's request for new courses was lawful given the pass percentage requirements? Was there procedural non-compliance in statutory amendments?

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that while the requirement of a pass percentage is a condition, the demands for prior courses cannot be applied rigidly for new courses, suggesting the need for regulation adjustments.

Result: The writ appeal stands dismissed.

Table of Content
1. application for new para-medical courses. (Para 1 , 2)
2. arguments regarding validity of rejection. (Para 6 , 7)
3. interpretation of statutory provisions. (Para 9 , 10 , 16)
4. discussion on educational standards. (Para 18 , 20 , 22)
5. conclusion on dismissal of appeal. (Para 23)

JUDGMENT :

Muralee Krishna, J.

The petitioner in W.P.(C) No.20249 of 2025 filed this writ appeal under Section 5 (i) of the Kerala High Court Act , 1958, challenging the judgment dated 09.09.2025 passed by the learned Single Judge in that writ petition.

2. The facts which led to the filing of the writ petition and then this writ appeal can be summarised as under:

2.1. The South Kerala Medical Mission of the South Kerala Diocese of the Church of South India, a society registered under the Travancore-Cochin Literary, Scientific and Charitable Societies Registration Act , 1955 (‘Act 12 of 1955’ in short), has established and is running the self-financing Medical College, namely, Dr. Somervell Memorial CSI Medical College and Hospital, Karakonam. Various para medical courses such as Bachelor of Physiotherapy (BPT), Bachelor of Science in Medical Laboratory Technology (BSc MLT), Bachelor of Science in Optometry (BSc Optometry) and Master of Hospital Administration are being conducted in the college and are managed and administered by another wing of the Medical College namely, Allied Health Sciences, the Principal of which is the appellant herein.

2.2. The 2nd respondent, Kerala University of Health Sciences (‘University’ in short) issued Ext.P1 Notification dated 31.08.2024, inviting applications for starting new courses and also enhancement of seats. The appellant had submitted applications for starting Bachelor of Occupational Therapy (BOT) course for 20 seats, Bachelor of Audiology and Speech Language Pathology (BASLP) course of 20 seats, Bachelor of Dialysis Technology (BDT) course of 10 seats, BSc Medical Micro Biology course with 30 seats and also an application for enhancement of number of seats of Master of Hospital Administration (MHA) course from 5 seats to20 seats.

2.3. The 1st respondent issued Exts.P2, P3 and P4 orders dated 27.06.2024, 07.10.2024 and 03.03.2025, granting No Objection Certificate (‘NOC’, for short) for starting BOT, BASLP, BDT and BSc medical Microbiology courses with the aforementioned numbers and also for enhancing the seats of MHA from 5 to 20. However, the 2nd respondent University by Ext.P5 letter dated 21.02.2025 rejected the application for starting BDT, BASLP, BOT and BSc Medical Microbiology courses. In Ext.P5, the 2nd respondent University stated the reason for rejection that the pass percentage of all regular examination of existing batches of BPT, BSc MLT, BSc Optometry and MHA is only 44.15%, which is below the minimum prescribed pass percentage. In Ext.P5, the 2nd respondent relied on ‘Clause 2(5)(v) of amended 5 Chapter XXI of Kerala University of Health Sciences First Statutes, 2013’ regarding affiliation of colleges, and also University order No.69/2022/Academic/KUHS dated 07.02.2022. It is stated in Ext.P5 that for the purpose of considering applications for enhancement of seats/additional courses, the average of pass percentage of all regular examination of existing batches of all courses under the same stream shall be minimum 50%.

2.4. The appellant states that Ext.P6 is the First Statute of the 2nd respondent University published in the official gazette dated 29.04.2013, and Chapter XXI of the Statute deals with affiliation of colleges. The University had amended Chapter XXI of Ext.P6 Statute by Ext.P7 notification dated 24.02.2020. According to the appellant, Ext.P7 is not published in the gazette, which is mandatory under Section 46 of the Kerala University of Health Sciences Act , 2010 (‘University Act’ in short).

2.5. It is the further case of the appellant that while issuing Ext.P5 letter dated 21.02.2025, the 2nd respondent University relied on Ext.P8 University order dated 07.02.2022, wher

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top