Back
2022 Supreme(Online)(KER) 21207
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
TUESDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022 / 21ST POUSHA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 10661 OF 2020
PETITIONER:
THE CHAIRMAN,
AL-AZAR COLLEGE OF ARTS AND SCIENCES,
EZHALLOOR, THODUPUZHA 685 605.
BY ADVS.
SRI.KURIAN GEORGE KANNANTHANAM (SR.)
SRI.P.M.SANEER
SRI.TONY GEORGE KANNANTHANAM
RESPONDENTS:
1
THE STATE OF KERALA
REP. BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
SCHEDULED CASTES/SCHEDULED TRIBES DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT., SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001.
2
THE DIRECTOR,
SCHEDULED CASTE DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT,
SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001.
3
THE DIRECTOR,
SCHEDULED TRIBE DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT,
SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001.
4
THE SCHEDULED CASTE DEVELOPMENT OFFICER,
ARAKKULAM PANCHAYAT, BUS STAND COMPLEX,
MOOLAMATTOM P.O. IDUKKI DISTRICT 685 589.
5
MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY.,
REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR
PRIYADARSHINI HILLS, KOTTAYAM 686 560.
BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. LATHA T. THANKAPPAN
SRI.ASOK M. CHERIAN, SC, M.G. UNIVERSITY
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION
ON
11.01.2022,
ALONG
WITH
Con.Case(C).1613/2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) No.10661/2020 & COC.1613/2021
: 2 :
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
TUESDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022 / 21ST POUSHA, 1943
CON.CASE(C) NO. 1613 OF 2021
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 10661/2020 OF HIGH
COURT OF KERALA
PETITIONER:
THE CHAIRMAN,
AL-AZHAR COLLEGE OF ARTS AND SCIENCE,
EZHALLOOR, THODUPUZHA, PIN-685 605.
BY ADVS.
P.M.SANEER
TONY GEORGE KANNANTHANAM
RESPONDENTS:
PUNEETH KUMAR IAS
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
SCHEDULED CASTE AND SCHEDULED TRIBE DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 001.
BY SMT.LATHA T THANKAPPAN, SPL.GP (SC/ST)
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 11.01.2022, ALONG WITH WP(C).10661/2020,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) No.10661/2020 & COC.1613/2021
: 3 :
N. NAGARESH, J.
`````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
W.P.(C) No.10661 of 2020 and
Contempt of Court Case (Civil) No.1613 of 2021
`````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````
Dated this the 11th day of January, 2022
The Government is legally bound to compensate institutions for fee concessions offered to reserve category students.
Headnote:
MINORITY INSTITUTION - FEES REIMBURSEMENT - [The petitioner, a minority institution, is entitled to reimbursement of fees for SC/ST/OEC students admitted through CAP by the University, as the Government is legally bound to compensate institutions for fee concessions offered to reserve category students.]
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a minority institution, sought reimbursement of fees for SC/ST/OEC students admitted through CAP by the University. The Government had issued an order stating that SC/ST students studying unaided courses in unaided institutions would not be granted educational concessions. However, the University Prospectus provided for fee concession to SC/ST/OEC students admitted under CAP quota based on Government Orders.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the Government is legally bound to reimburse the fee to the institution when educational concession is offered to any reserve category students in the University Prospectus based on Government Orders. The court further held that the classification created under the Government Order to deny benefit of educational fee concession to students undergoing unaided courses in unaided colleges, even though allotted by the University through a Centralised Allotment Process, is an unrealistic classification.
Issues: Whether the petitioner, a minority institution, is entitled to reimbursement of fees for SC/ST/OEC students admitted through CAP by the University.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the principle that the Government is legally bound to compensate institutions for fee concessions offered to reserve category students. The court also held that the classification created under the Government Order to deny benefit of educational fee concession to students undergoing unaided courses in unaided colleges, even though allotted by the University through a Centralised Allotment Process, is an unrealistic classification.
Final Decision: The court disposed of the writ petition directing respondents 1 to 3 to reimburse to the petitioner the whole fees in relation to the entire SC/ST/OEC candidates allotted to the petitioner’s college through the CAP by the 5th respondent-University.
J U D G M E N T
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
The petitioner, Chairman of an Unaided Arts and Science College belonging to a religious minority, is before this Court seeking the following reliefs:
(i) To issue a writ of Mandamus or other appropriate order or direction to direct respondents 1 to 3 to disburse to the petitioner the whole fees in relation to the entire SC/ST/OEC candidates allotted to petitioner's College through the CAP by the 5th respondent University, without any further delay.
(ii) To declare that all the SC/ST/OEC students admitted in petitioner's College are entitled to fees other students were liable to pay to the college; right from the inception of the CAP in 2007.
(iii) To declare that neither the State nor the University is competent, authorised or entitled to insist upon reservation of any seats in petitioner's College from 2020 onwards.
(iv) To issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate order or direction to direct the 5th respondent University not to make any further allotment of SC/ST/OEC candidates in any reservation category in petitioner's College.
2. The petitioner’s College is a Self Financing College, certified as a Minority Institution by the National Commission for Minority Educational Institutions, as per Ext.P1. The Government introduced Centralised Allotment Process (CAP) as per a Government Order dated 03.11.2006. Since the year 2007, admissions to 50% of seats in the College is through Centralised Allotment Process of the University. In the allotments to seats under CAP, the Government's decision on mandatory reservation is followed. For SC/ST candidates, fees had to be paid by the Government. The Prospectus issued by the University also stated that SC/ST/OEC students allotted by the University do not have to pay the fees.
3. This Court in the judgment reported in Akhil P.
Pushkar v. State of Kerala [2012 (4) KLT 12] declared that all SC/ST/OEC students studying in Kerala shall be extended with all benefits without reference to whether they are allotted in the merit quota or the Management Quota. The petitioner would submit that as far as Self Financing Colleges are concerned, they are not obligated to give reservation to SC/ST/OEC candidates and when the Government or University allots students stipulating that they need not pay fees, such authority is bound to reimburse the fee to the College.
4. The petitioner submitted Ext.P6 representation to the Government on 03.12.2019 requesting to compensate the College to the extent fee is not levied/paid by the reserved category students. Ext.P7 list of such students was also provided. The 2nd respondent-Director, SC Development Department forwarded Ext.P6 to the SC Development Officer, Idukki. The District Assistant SC Development Officer sent Ext.P9 stating that the eligibility for the grant is governed by Ext.P2 GO; that there is special provision for SC students whose parents’ annual income is less than ₹25,000/-, but they have to apply within three months of admission. The grievance of the petitioner remained unredressed.
5. The Senior Counsel assisted by the counsel for the petitioner argued that denial of financial benefits of SC/ST/OEC candidates allotted and admitted to the petitioner's College through the CAP, is in violation of the law laid down by a Division Bench of this Court in Akhil P. Pushkar (supra). Denial of the fees in relation to the SC/ST/OEC candidates admitted in petitioner's College, through the CAP, amounts to deprivation of petitioner's property without the authority of law and Constitution. Neither the Government nor the University has any power or authority to reserve seats in petitioner's College for SC/ST/OEC candidates, as the Government has not 'made any law' as contemplated in Article 15(5) of the Constitution. The reservations contemplated under Article 15(5) of the Constitution is not permitted in petitioner's College, it being a "minority" institution.
6. Respondents 1 to 4 resisted the writ petition filing counter affidav
