Petitioner

is

an

institution

based

in

Pune,

Maharashtra. Respondent no.1-Karnataka State Open

University offers distant education programme in various

courses. Accordingly, it had entered into a memorandum

of understanding with the petitioner-institution wherein

the petitioner-institution was permitted to admit students

for the courses of Bachelor of Business Administration

(BBA) and Master of Business Administration (MBA) in

Aviation and offer the distant education course as

prescribed by respondent no.1-University. Accordingly,

the petitioner used to enroll students and offer the said

courses as prescribed by respondent no.1-University.

2.

Respondent no.1-University being a creature of

Karnataka

State

Legislature

constituted

under

the

Karnataka State Open University Act, 1992, as per the

regulations prescribed by respondent no.9-University

Grants Commission could not have offered the said

4

courses outside the State of Karnataka. This irregularity

on part of respondent no.1 was noticed by respondent

no.9 and action was initiated from the academic year

2012-13 wherein respondent no.1 was directed not to

offer such courses which ultimately resulted in de-

recognition

of

respondent

no.1-University

itself.

However, the University has issued degree certificates to

students who have enrolled to study in centres like the

petitioner-institution outside the State of Karnataka till

the academic year 2012-13. However, degree certificates

have not been issued to certain students of petitioner-

institution.

3.

The case of the petitioner is that it has offered the

relevant course only till the academic year 2012-13 and

after due instructions were received from respondent

no.9 to respondent no.1-University, the memorandum of

understanding have been terminated and the petitioner is

not offering any such course. Its prayer is that the

students admitted by it till 2012-13 and who have

5

completed the said courses and successfully passed in the

examinations be saved by issuance of degree certificates.

4.

Respondent no.1-University is established under the

provisions of the Karnataka State Open University Act,

1992 by State of Karnataka and respondent no.9, which

recognizes institutions like respondent no.1-University

offering the courses like in the instant case, is established

by the Government of India under the provisions of the

University Grants Commission Act, 1956. This is a case

wherein there has been no proper coordination between

respondent no.1 and respondent no.9, resulting in the

petitioner-institution entering into a memorandum of

understanding with respondent no.1 and offering the

courses of BBA and MBA in Aviation to students who

enrolled with it. The petitioner and its students are made

to suffer because of the negligence on the part of the

officials of respondent no.1-University. It is not the case

of either respondent no.1 or respondent no.9 that the

courses offered by the petitioner-institution is inferior and

6

that its students are not meritorious enough to be not

conferred with the degree of BBA or MBA. They are being

denied the degree certificates only on the ground that

respondent no.1 ought not to have offered courses

beyond the territory of State of Karnataka.

5.

Given the peculiar facts and circumstances of the

case, the petitioner and its students cannot be made to

suffer due to follies of respondent no.1 and respondent

no.9. Under the circumstances, it is appropriate that

respondent no.1-University consider the case of the

petitioner and issue marks cards/degree certificates to its

students who have successfully passed the BBA and MBA

examinations in Aviation. Hence, the following:

ORDER

Respondent no.1-University is directed to consider

the representations made by the petitioner-institution and

in case of the students enrolled by the petitioner till the

academic year 2012-13 for the courses of BBA and MBA

in Aviation have passed the examinations offered by

7

respondent no.1-University, grant them