R. MAHADEVAN, J.

PROLOGUE

“Scholarliness and Kingship are on no count to be treated as equals, for a King is worshipped only in his kingdom, but a scholar is worshipped the world over” - Chanakya.

2. Education is a source of empowerment-social, economic and general. It is more so in a country like ours with wide diversity. Education is an instrument of training the intellect, refining the heart and disciplining the spirit. It is a means of creative enlightenment, a compassionate culture and goal oriented direction.

3. In a modern democracy like our country, both the State and the private stakeholders play a role in this process of empowerment of education. The problems are myriad. The educational institutions run by the Government often face a challenge of quality education, while the private educational institutions run on a commercial basis seek to create financial burden on those desirous of education. Thus, a balance has to be maintained between providing quality education and that too by not burning the pockets deep. This issue has received judicial consideration manifold times resulting in various judicial pronouncements.

4. In the present set of matters, we are confronted with such a situation where private legal education is not only sought to be regulated, but completely banned in the State of Tamil Nadu. It is the legality of this absolute ban which is in question, coupled with this is the issue raised by minority institutions as to whether the test applicable for them would be in any manner different. Lastly, a particular educational institution which had knocked the doors of the Court at different levels more than once and obtained permission to establish the college has got its doors shut at the last minute on the question of affiliation, solely based on such absolute ban created by a one section legislation.

THE FACTS

5. In the conspectus of the aforesaid controversy, we now turn to the facts.

W.P.No.2647 of 2015:

6.1. The petitioner-Vanniyar Educational Trust in W.P.No.2647 of 2015 is stated to have been established to provide free education to students who hail from weaker sections of the society and for their welfare. The trust passed a resolution on 27.6.2007 to start a Law College under the name and style of “Saraswathi Law College” at Tindivanam and an application dated 25.9.2007 was made to the Law Department of the State of Tamil Nadu/first respondent to issue No Objection Certificate for starting the private law college.

6.2. Since there was no response, the petitioner filed W.P.No.27590 of 2008 seeking a writ of mandamus directing the first respondent to issue the said No Objection Certificate and consequent to the same for affiliation to be granted with the Tamil Nadu Dr. Ambedkar Law University and the Bar Council of India. The writ petition was decided on 20.11.2008 issuing a direction to the first respondent to consider the application submitted by the petitioner. On consideration, the first respondent denied the No Objection Certificate by his letter dated 23.1.2009 on the ground that no guidelines were framed for issuing such No Objection Certificate.

6.3. The petitioner then filed W.P.No.2003 of 2009 seeking quashing of the said communication dated 23.1.2009 and for a direction to grant permission/No Objection Certificate for starting the private law college. This writ petition was allowed on 13.8.2010. The Court framed two questions of law to be examined in this petition as under:

“(1) Whether the present sanctioned strength of law colleges available in the State of Tamil Nadu is sufficient to meet the requirement of the people in Tamil Nadu for getting their legal remedies adjudicated without delay ?

(2) Whether the State Government can take a policy decision not to consider any private law college within the state of Tamil Nadu on any reason based on the seats available in various law Colleges i