The Chancellor's authority to annul off-campus centres without Government sanction is upheld, affirming that the syndicate's recommendations must comply with statutory requirements.

1. Under challenge in these writ petitions is the order dated 17/06/2015 passed by the Chancellor of the respondent university annulling the decision of the syndicate of the respondent university dated 07/01/2013 sanctioning 77 off - campus centres on the ground that the said off - campus centres were functioning without the sanction of the Government, and the consequential proceedings issued by the respondent university.

2. WP (C) Nos. 15791 / 2015 and 19339/2015
These writ petitions are filed by a former Head of Department of Economics under the respondent university, who has located off - campus centres at Pala and Kottayam, which according to him, are within the territorial jurisdiction of the respondent university, permitted by S.4(1) of the M. G. Universities Act (for short, the Act). In WP (C) No. 15791 of 2015, the petitioner is seeking a direction to the respondent university not to close down the petitioner’s off - campus centres and to declare that petitioner’s off - campus centres are within the parametres of law. This writ petition was filed when Ext. P10 notice in the said writ petition was issued to the petitioner by the Chancellor for attending a hearing scheduled to be held on 30/05/2015. He filed the second writ petition i.e. WP (C) No. 19339 of 2015, challenging the order of the Chancellor dated 17/06/2016 (Ext. P15) passed after hearing the petitioner as well as other affected parties. In that writ petition, the petitioner alleges that emergent steps are taken by the respondent university to close down the off - campus centres by the petitioners.

3. WP(C) No. 19244/2015
This writ petition is filed by a third year student of Rural Education Community Centre (a centre run by the petitioner in WP (C) No. 19274/2015) which is an off - campus education centre of the respondent university. He alleges that he belongs to the Scheduled Caste community and is residing at Ayyampilly in Vypin Island having high density of population. According to him, there is neither any Government college nor any private college near his residence. Therefore, when the respondent university has started an off - campus centre, the petitioner joined for B. Com course in the said centre where regular teaching has been going on. The petitioner got himself registered at the M. G. University and appeared for the examinations at the centres decided by the university. He is aggrieved by the proceedings dated 17/06/2015 (Ext. P2) issued by the 2nd respondent (the Chancellor) discontinuing the off - campus centres within its territorial jurisdiction, and the consequential order dated 20/06/2015 issued by the 1st respondent (Ext. P3) implementing Ext. P2.

4. The petitioner points out that he is pursuing final year for B.Com course in the centre and the abrupt discontinuation of the centre would effect his studies and render his life miserable. He further points out that the respondent university did not consider the difficulties faced by him and other similarly placed students before issuing Exts. P2 and P3 orders in that writ petition. He also points out that ongoing studies of the petitioner and other students would be interrupted if Exts. P2 and P3 are implemented. He would further allege that while the students in the affiliated colleges get regular tuition, the petitioner and other similarly placed students are denied that opportunity by implementing Exts. P2 and P3 which amounts to discrimination and injustice.

5. The petitioner alleges that through Ext. P2 proceedings, the 2nd respondent Chancellor has permitted to continue the courses and to protect the interest of the students for continuing the studies. However, in spite of the said direction, the 1s