Back
2012 Supreme(Mad) 583
High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD K. SHARMA
J. Imam Hussain
Versus
The Director of Technical Education, Chennai & Others
W.P. No. 28625 of 2011 & M.P.Nos.1 & 2 of 2011 & 1 of 2012
Decided On : 06-02-2012
For the Petitioner:Mr. M. Ajmal Khan, Advocate.
For the Respondents:R1, Mr. R. Ravichandran, A.G.P. R2, Mr. Mani Sankar Gopal, Advocates.
The central legal point established in the judgment is that the AICTE regulation required a minimum of 45% marks for admission, and the court upheld the application of this requirement in the petitioner's case.
Headnote:
Rounding Off - Admission Eligibility - AICTE Regulation, Orissa Superior Judicial Service and Orissa Judicial Service Rules - [AICTE Regulation, Orissa Superior Judicial Service and Orissa Judicial Service Rules] - The court discussed the application of AICTE regulation and Orissa Judicial Service Rules in determining the eligibility for admission to MBA Course. The judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of U.P. and another vs Pawan Kumar Tiwari and others [(2005) 2 SCC 10] was relied upon by the petitioner, while the respondent relied on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Orissa Public Service Commission and another vs Rupashree Chowdhary and another [(2011)8 SCC 108]. The court found that the AICTE regulation required a minimum of 45% marks for admission, and as the petitioner had secured 44.538% marks, it could not be rounded off to 45% as per the requirement.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought approval for admission to MBA Degree Course, but the request was declined by the college citing the petitioner's failure to meet the minimum 45% marks requirement as per AICTE new regulations.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the impugned order declining the petitioner's admission was in accordance with the AICTE regulation, which required a minimum of 45% marks for admission.
Issues: The main issue was whether the college's refusal to round off the petitioner's 44.538% marks to 45% for admission to the MBA Course was arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the AICTE regulation required a minimum of 45% marks for admission, and as the petitioner had secured 44.538% marks, it could not be rounded off to 45% as per the requirement.
Final Decision: The writ petition was dismissed, and connected miscellaneous petitions were also dismissed.
1. The petitioner has approached this Court with the prayer for issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorari, to quash the order dated 28.11.2011, passed by the Aalim Muthammed Salegh College of Engineering, declining the request of the petitioner, for approval to his admission to MBA Degree Course.
2 The impugned order reads as under:
"AALIM MUHAMMED SALEGH COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING
Approved by All India Council for Technical Education, New Delhi.
Affiliated to Anna University, Chennai
NBA Accredited. An ISO 9001 : 2008 Certified Institution
"Nizara educational Campus", Muthapudupet, Avadi I.A.F., Chennai 600 055.
28.11.2011
Mr.Imam Hussain J.
64/1 A, Kottai Kalam South Street,
li Nagaram, Theni, Theni District.
Sub: Admissions 2011-2012 Eligibility
for admission declined-By the Directorate – reg.
Ref: Verification of records by DOTE
on 16.11.2001
In continuation of oral information made to your parents, it is hereby informed that your admission in MBA had not been approved by the DOTE Authorities stating that the minimum marks 45% is not there as per AICTE new regulations. The admission was refused since the percentage could not be rounded off.
Therefore, you are requested to collect the originals from our Head office.
Regards, For Aalim Muhammed Salegh College of Engineering
sd/-
Principal
Seal-"
3. The petitioner isa first year student pursuing MBA Degree Course in Aalim Muhammed Salegh College of Engineering. The petitioner comes from rural background, and got his Bachelors degree in Commerce from the M.S.S.Wakf Board College, Madurai.
4. In order to pursue higher education in the Master Degree in Business Administration (MBA), the petitioner applied for admission under the management quota for the year 2011-2012. The petitioner was admitted by the third respondent on furnishing the necessary certificates, and is petitioner thereafter attending classes regularly.
5. The submission of the petitioner, is that the petitioner was informed vide impugned order that his admission to MBA Course has not been approved by the Director of Technical Education, as he had failed to get minimum marks of 45% as per AICTE new regulation. The petitioner was informed that his 44.538% marks could not be rounded off to 45% to make his eligible for admission.
6. The petitioner challenged the impugned order, on the ground that the action of the respondent in not rounding off aggregate marks, secured by him in Bachelors degree is arbitrary and unreasonable, therefore, violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
7. In support of this contention, reliance is placed on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of U.P. and another vs Pawan Kumar Tiwari and others [(2005) 2 SCC 10] wherein it was held that the Rule of rounding off is based on logic and common sense, i.e., if part is one-half or more, its value is to be increased to one, and if part is less than half then its value shall be ignored.
8. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in this case directed that 46.50 should be rounded off to 47 and not to 46. It was a case where, the allocation of number of vacancies was considered for reservation.
9. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court is based on basic principle of rounding off, therefore, by applying the law laid down in this judgment, the impugned order cannot be sustained, being violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
10. The learned counsel for the respondent No.2 on the other hand, placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Orissa Public Service Commission and another vs Rupashree Chowdhary and another [(2011)8 SCC 108] wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court was pleased to hold that 44.93% could not be rounded off to 45, to make candidates eligible for appearing in interview dehors the rules. The judgment relied on by the petitioner was also considered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and distinguished. The para 7
