The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of adherence to prescribed qualifications for admission and the liability of authorities for unjustified denial of admission.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records of the second respondent in respect of Clause 6(a)(i) of the Notification of Information and Instructions for B.Arch Degree Course-2017 and quash the same insofar as the petitioner is concerned and direct the second respondent to follow the notification dated 15.06.2017 issued by the first respondent in respect of admission to B.Arch Degree Course 2017.)

1. The prayer in the Writ Petition reads as follows:

“to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records of the second respondent in respect of Clause 6(a)(i) of the Notification of Information and Instructions for B.Arch Degree Course-2017 and quash the same insofar as the petitioner is concerned and direct the second respondent to follow the notification dated 15.06.2017 issued by the first respondent in respect of admission to B.Arch Degree Course 2017.

2. The challenge in the Writ Petition is to the Clause 6(a)(i) of the prospectus issued by The Tamil Nadu Engineering Admissions, represented by its Secretary, Anna University. The said challenge has become infructuous in view of passage of time. However, I do not think that justice will be done, if I am to throw out the Writ Petition on the ground that the prayer has become infructuous by efflux of time, as I find that the second respondent had not only acted in utter disregard of the clarifications issued by the first respondent, but has also disobeyed positive directions of this Court.

3. The following facts will demonstrate how unsafe are the lives of our youngsters in the hands of unscrupulous Academicians and Executives, who preside over the very vital rights of the youngsters and decide on the policies of education. Education as is understood in the normal meaning of the term is not only to provide qualification for eking out to ones livelihood, but also to develop a fine human being and to shape the individual as a person acceptable to the society.

4. Unfortunately in the recent days, Education has not only become commercial but has also fallen into the hands of either unqualified persons or persons who because of their educational qualification that is appended to their names become intellectually arrogant and take decisions which in fact spoil the lives of young students. The case on hand comes under the second category stated above.

5. The petitioner who appeared for 12th standard examinations in the year 2017 completed her course under CBSE Syllabus and obtained 82% marks. She had also appeared for JEE II (Joint Entrance Examination) and had obtained high percentile of marks in JEE main examinations. She had obtained 226 out of 390 where the minimum pass mark was only 81. The Council for Architecture namely the first respondent which is in-charge of Education relating to Architecture in the country had been insisting that a candidate who wants to join Bachelor Degree Course in Architecture (B.Arch) should clear the National Aptitude Test in Architecture (NATA).

6. This was the subject matter of litigation and the Hon’ble Supreme Court passed an interim order on 24.07.2008 observing that apart from NATA, there could be other qualifying examinations and it will be open to different State Governments or the Central Board of Secondary Education to conduct an aptitude test for the purposes of admission in Bachelor of Architecture Course. It was also observed that it will not be necessary for students to pass NATA, the notice issued by the Council for Architecture on 12.03.2008 making a pass in NATA mandatory for admission to Bachelor of Architecture was stayed with Hon’ble Supreme Court. Despite such stay having been granted several State Boards and including the second respondent continued to insist upon a pass in NATA as a qualification for admission to Bachelor of Architecture Course. This led to the first respondent namely the Council for Arc