Disposed

Sreehari.M. v. the Mahatma Gandhi University and Ors.

Kerala HC15 Dec 2011WP(C)/8979/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition filed by an M.Tech student challenging the University's decision to issue degree certificates with a different branch name and specialization than those in his admission prospectus. The Court directed the University to issue certificates reflecting the subject of specialisation pursued.

What did the court decide?

Directing respondent universities to issue mark lists and certificates to the petitioner in accordance with the subject of specialisation under which he pursued studies.

Sreehari.M. Vs the Mahatma Gandhi University and Ors. — Education and Admissions | Kerala HC (2011)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM THURSDAY, THE 15TH DECEMBER 2011 / 24TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 WP(C).No. 8979 of 2011(V) ---------------------------------------

¶4

PETITIONER(S): -----------------------

¶5

SREEHARI.M, `ATHIRA', THULAMPARAMPNADUVATH, HARIPPAD P.O., ALAPPUZHA-690 514. BY ADVS. SRI.MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN, SRI.DEEPU LAL MOHAN, SRI.DILIP FRANCIS, SMT.S.LEENA.

¶6

RESPONDENT(S):

¶7

---------------------------

¶8

1. THE MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, PRIYADARSHINI HILLS P.O., KOTTAYAM-686 560.

¶9

2. THE VICE-CHANCELLOR, MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, PRIYADARSHINI HILLS P.O., KOTTAYAM-686 560.

¶10

3. THE PRINCIPAL, RAJIV GANDHI INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, PAMBADI, VELLOOR P.O., KOTTAYAM-686 501.

¶11

4. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

¶12

R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI. T.A. SHAJI, SC, M.G.UNIVERSITY R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶13

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15/12/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

Kss

¶15

WPC.NO.8979/2011 V

¶16

APPENDIX

¶17

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶18

P1: COPY OF THE PROSPECTUS FOR ADMISSION TO POST GRADUATE DEGREE COURSES IN ENGINEERING FOR THE YEAR 2010, DOWNLOADED FROM THE OFFICIAL WEBSITE.

¶19

P2: COPY OF THE MARKLIST DTD. 12/10/2009 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT UNIVERSITY IN RESPECT OF THE MARKS OBTAINED BY THE PETITIONER IN THE 1ST SEMESTER M.TECH DEGREE EXAMINATION HELD IN MAY 2009.

¶20

P3: COPY OF THE MARKLIST DTD. 31/05/2010 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT UNIVERSITY IN RESPECT OF THE MARKS OBTAINED BY THE PETITIONER IN THE 2ND SEMESTER M.TECH DEGREE EXAMINATION HELD IN OCTOBER 2010.

¶21

P4: COPY OF THE MARKLIST DTD. 30/07/2010 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT UNIVERSITY IN RESPECT OF THE MARKS OBTAINED BY THE PETITIONER IN THE 3RD SEMESTER M.TECH DEGREE EXAMINATION HELD IN JUNE 2010.

¶22

P5: COPY OF THE DEGREE CERTIFICATE BEARING REGISTER NO.16158 DTD. 10/08/2010 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT UNIVERSITY TO ONE SREEKUMAR.R.

¶23

P6: COPY OF U.O.NO.3908/AC.AIV/4/ACAD/10 DTD. 06/08/2010 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

¶24

P7: COPY OF U.O.NO.5981/AIV/1/ACAD/10 DTD.22/11/2010 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

¶25

P8: COPY OF THE LETTER NO.ISRO HQ:ICRB:02:2010 DTD. 09/03/2011 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE INDIAN SPACE RESEARCH ORGANISATION.

¶26

P9: COPY OF THE PRESS RELEASE DTD. 16/03/2011 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT UNIVERSITY.

¶27

P10: COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DTD. 17/03/2011 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

¶28

P11: COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM NO.E1.34/M/.TECH/IEM-NC DTD. 16/03/2011 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE ASSISTANT CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATION.

..2/-

Kss

..2....

WPC.NO.8979/2011 V

¶33

P12: COPY OF THE UNDERTAKING DTD.22/03/2011 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER, ISRO SATELLITE CENTRE, BANGALORE.

¶34

P13: COPY OF THE MARKLIST DTD. 14/03/2011 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT UNIVERSITY IN RESPECT OF THE MARKS OBTAINED BY THE PETITIONER IN THE 4TH SEMESTER M.TECH DEGREE EXAMINATION HELD IN JANUARY, 2011.

¶35

P14: COPY OF THE PROVISIONAL DEGREE CERTIFICATE DTD. 01/04/2011 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT UNIVERSITY IN RESPECT OF THE M.TECH DEGREE COURSE UNDERGONE BY THE PETITIONER.

¶36

P15: COPY OF U.O.NO.563/AIV/1/2011 DTD. 04/02/2011 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT UNIVERSITY.

¶37

P16: COPY OF THE PROSPECTUS FOR ADMISSION TO POST GRADUATE DEGREE COURSES IN ENGINEERING FOR THE YEAR 2011.

¶38

P17: COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DTD. 15/11/2010 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

¶39

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:

¶40

R1(A): COPY OF THE THE RELEVANT PAGE OF M.TECH REGULATIONS.

¶41

R1(B): COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD. 20/06/2009.

/TRUE COPY/

P..A.TO JUDGE

Kss

C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J.

¶46

W.P.(C) No.8979 of 2011

¶47

Dated this the 15^th day of December, 2011

¶48

J U D G M E N T

¶49

Petitioner is a student who had completed Post Graduate Degree Course in Engineering (M.Tech) from the 3^rd respondent institution, which is affiliated to the 1^st respondent University. The name of the course in which he was admitted and studied is M.Tech in 'Mechanical Engineering' with specialisation of subject as 'Industrial Engineering and Management'. The petitioner relied on Ext.P1 prospectus issued by the 4^th respondent in order to point out that the course offered by the 3^rd respondent institution was having the branch name and specialisation as mentioned above. When the petitioner was pursuing his studies in the last semester (4^th semester) the 1^st respondent had issued Ext.P6 order, wherein it is stated that the 2^nd respondent in exercise of power vested under the Mahatma

¶50

W.P.(C).8979/11-V

¶51

-2-

¶52

Gandhi University Act, 1985 had approved the branches of study and specialisations in M.Tech course offered by the 1^st respondent University. As per the list appended to Ext.P6 the M.Tech course in Mechanical Engineering branch is provided with the specialisation 'Production and Industrial Engineering'. So also the branch in 'Industrial Engineering and Management' is provided with the specialisation 'Industrial Management'. On the basis of Ext.P6 the 1^st respondent University had further issued Ext.P7 proceedings intimating about the decision taken by the 2^nd respondent to approve the recommendation of the 'Board of Studies in Engineering (PG)' to issue mark list and Degree Certificate as M.Tech in Industrial Engineering and Management for students admitted from the year 2008 onwards and to issue equivalency certificate for previous batches prior to 2008 admission. It is also pointed out that through Ext.P15, the Academic Council of the 1^st respondent University had ratified the decision taken by the 2^nd respondent as per Ext.P6.

¶53

W.P.(C).8979/11-V

¶54

-3-

¶55

Grievance voiced by the petitioner is that the

¶56

decision taken in Ext.P6 and P7 will cause prejudice to him, because going by Ext.P6 the specialization provided to the branch of Industrial Engineering and Management is different from the specialization in which he had obtained admission and completed studies. Incidentally he had pointed out that he is seeking job in the Indian Space Research Organization (ISRO) pursuant to the applications invited for the appointment to the post of Scientist/Engineer. Exhibit P8 is the copy of the interview card received by the petitioner with respect to the post. According to the petitioner, any variation in the name of the course or the subject of specialization from the testimonials already produced will result in rejection of his candidature. Under such circumstances the petitioner is seeking relief to quash Ext.P7 and P15 to the extent it relates to issuance of Certificate for M.Tech in 'Industrial Engineering and Management' with retrospective effect for admissions given from the academic year 2008 onwards.

¶57

W.P.(C).8979/11-V

¶58

-4-

¶59

It is noticed that the branch in which the

¶60

petitioner was given admission for the M.Tech course as evident from Ext.P1 is 'Mechanical Engineering' with subject of specialization as 'Industrial Engineering and Management'. It is evident that, the subject of specialisation in which he had pursued studies is 'Industrial Engineering and Management'. Now the 1^st respondent University had taken a decision to change the name of the branch as 'M.Tech in Industrial Engineering and Management'. By specifying the name of the subject of specialisation as the name of the branch itself, no prejudice will be caused to the petitioner. But apprehension of the petitioner is that, the subject of specialization mentioned in Ext.P6 for the branch of 'Industrial Engineering and Management' is only as 'Industrial Management' whereas the petitioner had pursued studies in 'Industrial Engineering and Management'.

¶61

According to learned standing counsel appearing for the 1^st respondent University, such apprehension has no

¶62

W.P.(C).8979/11-V

¶63

-5-

¶64

basis. He had produced Ext.R1(a) which is the “Regulations for M.Tech Programme” adopted by the respondent University. Clause (3) of Ext.R1(a) deals with the branches of study approved by the University. It is pointed out that, in the discipline of M.Tech in Industrial Engineering and Management there is no specialisation of subject provided. Learned standing counsel pointed out that there is no difficulty in granting equivalency certificate as contemplated under Ext.P7 with respect to the students admitted from the year 2008 onwards till the change of name of the branches is implemented. According to the learned standing counsel the above aspects will resolve the difficulty if any apprehended by the petitioner and that there will not be any difficulty for him to seek any job on the basis of the certificates issued.

¶65

While considering the issue, I am of the view that the petitioner is entitled to get certificate from the 1^st respondent University with respect to the course in which he pursued studies. That be so, he is entitled to get

¶66

W.P.(C).8979/11-V

¶67

-6-

¶68

certificates and mark lists with respect to the subject which he had studied in the course. Prima facie the respondent University is not justified in changing the name of the course or any of the subjects after the student had pursued studies and completed the course. But in the case at hand, it is evident that the subject of specialisation under which the petitioner had pursued studies, is 'Industrial Engineering and Management'. Now the name of the course (branch) is changed as 'M.Tech in Industrial Engineering and Management'. Therefore such a change will not in any manner cause prejudice to the petitioner since the name is changed only in accordance with the subject of specialisation in which he had pursued studies. But with respect to the subject of specialisation, the apprehension expressed is to the effect that if the certificates are issued with a different subject, that may cause problem in seeking employment. I find merit in such an argument. But as pointed out by learned standing counsel, there is no specialization provided with respect to the branch of

¶69

W.P.(C).8979/11-V

¶70

-7-

¶71

M.Tech in Industrial Engineering and Management. Therefore I am of the view that interest of justice will be served if a specific direction is issued to the 1^st respondent University to issue certificate either without mentioning the subject of specialisation or with mentioning specialisation as 'Industrial Engineering and Management' itself. It is also necessary to issue equivalency certificate for the purpose of evidencing the change of name of the branch effected after commencement of the course.

¶72

Therefore the writ petition is disposed of directing the respondents 1 and 2 to issue mark list and certificates with respect to the course completed by the petitioner in accordance with the observations made as above, as and when requested by the petitioner.

¶73

Sd/-

¶74

C.K. ABDUL REHIM,

JUDGE.

okb

True copy

P.A to Judge

Sreehari.M. v. the Mahatma Gandhi University and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sreehari.M. v. the Mahatma Gandhi University and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Reghu.R. Vs State of Kerala

Abdulla Vs State of Kerala

Muhammed Sherif Vs Revenue Divisional Officer,Tirur

Raju Cyriac Vs the Dist.Collector

Jose Joseph Vakayil Vs Union of India and Others

Hindustan Cocacola Beverages Pvt.Ltd Vs Director of Industries & Commerce