Back
2021 Supreme(Online)(KER) 2288
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
ANIL K. NARENDRAN, J
THE CHAIRMAN – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
WP(C)/16471/2020
SRI.KURIAN GEORGE KANNANTHANAM (SR.), SRI.P.M.SANEER, SRI.TONY GEORGE KANNANTHANAM, SRI.THOMAS GEORGE, SHRI.SIVASHANKAR PANICKER, ALEX GEORGE, SRI.ASOK M. CHERIAN, SC, M.G. UNIVERSITY, SRI K.R.RENJIT, GOVERNMENT PLEADER
The court reinforced that compliance with regulatory frameworks and received approvals validate a private institution's request for course inclusion in centralized admissions.
Headnote:
Writ - Education - Article 226 - The court upheld the inclusion of BBA LLB and B.Com LLB programs in the college's centralised allotment after confirming affiliation and government approvals.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought to include new law courses in a private college's centralised allotment process following affiliation approval. The college faced restrictions preventing full participation in admissions despite compliance with previous regulations.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner received administrative approval to start the new courses. The interim orders had been complied with, justifying the inclusion of courses in the centralized allotment process.
Issues: Whether the petitioner’s college should be included in the centralized allotment process for new law courses after receiving necessary approvals.
Ratio Decidendi: The court determined that existing affiliations and compliance with regulatory requirements warranted the inclusion of the new courses in the admission process.
Final Decision: The petition is disposed of in favor of the petitioner.
JUDGMENT
Petitioner, the Chairman of Noorul Islam Trust, Thodupuzha, which has established a private self financing law college, namely, Al -Azhar Law College at Thodupuzha, has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India , seeking a writ of certiorari to quash condition No.2 in Ext.P6 order dated 13.07.2020 of the 3rd respondent Mahatma Gandhi University; and a writ of mandamus commanding the 2nd respondent Commissioner of Entrance Examinations to include the two new courses, namely, B.Com LLB and BBA LLB in the petitioner's college for centralised allotment, before the closure of receipt of options by candidates.
The petitioner has also sought for other consequential reliefs.
2. On 12.08.2020, when this writ petition came up for admission, this Court admitted the matter on file. The Learned Government Pleader took notice for respondents 1 and 2 and the learned Standing Counsel took notice for the 3rd respondent University. This Court passed an interim order dated 12.08.2020 and paragraphs 2 to 4 of that order read thus:
“2. The petitioner is a Trust. The petitioner runs a Law College namely, Al-Azar Campus, Thodupuzha, Idukki District. As seen from Ext.P6, Mahatma Gandhi University granted extension of affiliation to the following courses:
| Sl. No. | Name of College | Programme | Intake |
| 1 | Al-Azhar Law College, Thodupuzha | 1.BA LLB (Hons)(5 Year) | 60 |
| 2. LLB (3 Year) | 60 | ||
| 3. BBA LLB (Hons)(5 Year) | 60 | ||
| 4. B.Com LLB (Hons)(5 Year) | 60 | ||
| 5. LLM (Branch I-Criminal Law) | 15 | ||
| 6. LLM (Branch II- Commercial Law) | 15 |
3. There is a centralised allotment of 50% of seats in private and unaided colleges of the State. Accordingly, the petitioner's college were included in the allotment process. However, as seen from Ext.P10 notification issued by the Commissioner for Entrance Examinations, the petitioner's college was included only for admission to BA LLB course with intake of 60. The petitioner is already having affiliation with the University in regard to BBA LLB for 5 years with intake of 60 and B.Com LLB for 5 years with intake of 60.
4. In view of the fact that the petitioner is enjoying the affiliation, it is appropriate to direct the Commissioner for Entrance Examinations also to include the petitioner's College for allotment of 50% of seats for BBA LLB and B.Com LLB courses in accordance with Ext.P10 notification. That shall be done before the closure of registration as notified in Ext.P10.”
3. On 24.08.2020, when this writ petition came up for consideration, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the interim order of this Court has already been complied with. 4. On 21.10.2020, when this writ petition came up for consideration, this Court passed the following order: “The 1st relief sought for in this writ petition is the writ of certiorari to quash condition No.2 in Ext.P6 University order dated 13.07.2020. The condition No.2 reads thus:
“The Colleges shall obtain renewed NOC from the Government and Bar Council of India for the Academic Year 2020-21.”
(underline supplied)
The petitioner has not chosen to implead the Bar Council of India as a party to this writ petition. Without noticing the said fact, the Registry has numbered this writ petition.
The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner shall file an application to implead the Bar Council of India as additional respondent.”
5. The petitioner has filed I.A.No.2 of 2020 seeking an order to implead the Chairman of Bar Council of India as additional 4th respondent and I.A.No.3 of 2020 to accept Ext.P12 as additional document. Both interlocutory applications were allowed on
12.01.2021.
6. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 and 2 and also the learned Standing Counsel for the 3rd respondent University. 7. During the course of arguments, it is pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the learned Government Pleader that by Ext.
