SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 49294

KERALA HIGH COURT
Anil K. Narendran, P. V. Balakrishnan, JJ
Kunhitharuvai Memorial Charitable Trust (KMCT) – Appellant
Versus
Kerala University of Health Sciences (KUHS) – Respondent
W.A.No.680 of 2025 | W.A.No.681 of 2025 | R.P.No.616 of 2025 | R.P.No.619 of 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Adv.K.S. Sajeev Kumar, Adv.Shaji Chirayath
For the Respondents: Shri. Binny Thomas

The court emphasized that unfounded allegations of bias do not warrant recusal, reinforcing the principle against forum shopping and reiterating the judicial responsibility to uphold impartiality.

Headnote:(A) University Grants Commission (Institutions Deemed to be Universities) Regulations, 2023 - High Court Act, 1958 - Writ appellate jurisdiction - Challenges to the rejection of No Objection Certificate (NOC) requests for various institutions by the Kerala University of Health Sciences (KUHS) - Learned Single Judge set aside non-speaking orders, directing fresh consideration within three months. (Paras 2, 4, 29)

(B) Forum shopping and bias - Application for recusal due to past representation of appellant must be substantiated; unfounded allegations will not be entertained - Tendency of forum hunting discouraged by courts. (Paras 26, 28)

(C) Review Petition - Not maintainable when the judgment has already acted upon; judicial discipline requires adherence to the established roster for case assignment. (Paras 36, 41)

Facts of the case:
The appellant, KMCT, challenged multiple orders from KUHS denying NOC to transform its institutions into a Distinct Institution category. The Single Judge found the orders non-speaking and mandated fresh consideration.

Findings of Court:
The High Court stressed adherence to proper procedures and indicated dismissive behavior toward unfounded claims regarding potential bias.

Issues: Whether the denial of NOC was justified, and whether the recusal request was valid.

Ratio Decidendi: The court found that applicants must present valid grounds for recusal and emphasized that not all prior representation creates a conflict, discouraging attempts at manipulating court assignments.

Result: Interlocutory applications dismissed with costs of Rs.50,000/- imposed on the appellant.

Table of Content
1. filing of writ petitions (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. common judgment setting aside noc rejection (Para 4 , 5)
3. procedural events in court sessions (Para 6 , 9 , 10)
4. judicial conduct and recusal principles (Para 14 , 15 , 24)
5. arguments for and against bias claims (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19)
6. notability of bias and judicial precedent (Para 20 , 21 , 22)
7. forum shopping and judicial integrity (Para 26 , 27 , 28)
8. review jurisdiction and limits (Para 36 , 37 , 38)
9. court order and cost imposition (Para 42 , 43)

1. W.A.Nos.680 of 2025 and 681 of 2025 arise out of the judgment dated 24/03/2025 of the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C)Nos.38856 of 2024 and 42835 of 2023.

2. The appellant, namely, Kunhitharuvai Memorial Charitable Trust (KMCT), filed W.P.(C)No.38856 of 2024 challenging Ext.P4 order dated 19/12/2023 issued by the 1st respondent Kerala University of Health Sciences (KUHS), whereby its request for grant of No Objection Certificate (NOC) to submit application before the University Grants Commission (UGC) in order to include KMCT Dental College, Manassery, Mukkam, Kozhikode in the proposed KMCT Distinct Institution (Deemed to be University) under Distinct Institution category stands rejected, and Ext.P6 order dated 17/01/2024 issued by the 1st respondent University, whereby a similar request for grant of NOC to submit application before the UGC to include National College of Pharmacy, Manassery, Mukkam, Kozhikode in the proposed KMCT Distinct Institution (Deemed to be University) under the Distinct Institution category stands rejected. Other consequential reliefs were also sought for in that writ petition.

3. The appellant filed W.P.(C)No.42835 of 2023 challenging Ext.P4 order dated 07/08/2023 issued by the 1st respondent University, whereby its request to grant of NOC to submit application before the UGC to include KMCT Medical College and KMCT Ayurveda College, Manassery, Mukkam, Kozhikode in the proposed KMCT Distinct Institution (Deemed to be University) under Distinct Institution category stands rejected, and Ext.P6 order dated 08.11.2023 issued by the 1st respondent University, whereby a similar request for grant of NOC to submit application before UGC to include KMCT College of Nursing, Manassery, Mukkam, Kozhikode in the proposed KMCT Distinct Institution (Deemed to be University) under the Distinct Institution category stands rejected. Other consequential reliefs were also sought for in that writ petition.

4. The above writ petitions were disposed of by a common judgment dated 24/03/2025 of the learned Single Judge, by setting aside Exts.P4 and P6 orders in the respective writ petitions and directing the competent among the respondents to pass orders afresh, on the requests made for NOC, within a period of three months. By the judgment dated 24/03/2025, Exts.P4 and P6 orders in the respective writ petitions were set aside, since those orders are non - speaking orders. In the judgment, the learned Single Judge has made it clear that the Court has not pronounced anything on the merits of the claim made by the writ petitioner.

5. Challenging the common judgment dated 24/03/2025 of the learned Single Judge, the appellant filed W.A.Nos.680 of 2025 and 681 of 2025, invoking the provisions under S.5(i) of the Kerala High Court Act, 1958 .

6. On 08/04/2025, when W.A.Nos.680 of 2025 and 681 of 2025 came up for admission before the Division Bench, notice before admission was ordered. The learned Standing Counsel for the 1st respondent University sought time to address the Court as to why NOC was not granted. In the order dated 08/04/2025, the Division Bench noticed the provisions contained in Clause (6) of the University Grants Commission (Institutions Deemed to be Universities) Regulations, 2023.

7. On 16/04/2025, when the writ appeals came up for consideration before the Division Bench, the following order was passed;
"Shri. Binny Thomas, the learned Standing Counsel for the University, today has again sought one w























































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top