The High Court of Kerala disposed of the writ appeal. It held that the Central Government's letter rendered the notification for establishing a PIO/NRI University infructuous. Thus, no need to decide on the petitioner's eligibility or the nature of the Trust as the matter became moot.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE DR. MANJULA CHELLUR &
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF JULY 2013/19TH ASHADHA, 1935
WA.No. 197 of 2013 () IN WP(C).7661/2009
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 7661/2009 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 26-07-2012
APPELLANT/PETITIONER IN THE WP(C):
CHARITABLE EDUCATIONAL AND WELFARE SOCIETY, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, K.J.ABRAHAM
BY SRI.ABRAHAM VAKKANAL, SENIOR ADVOCATE BY ADVS. SRI.JESTIN MATHEW
SRI.T.S.JOHN
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS IN WPC:
------------------------------
1. GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT (PIO/ NRI UNIVERSITY, MINISTRY OF OVERSEAS INDIAN AFFARIS) DIASPORA SERVICES DIVISION), AKBAR BHAVAN, NEW DELHI - 110 001
2. THE SCREENING COMMITTEE (PIO/ NRI UNIVERSITY, MINISTRY OF OVERSEAS INDIAN AFFARIS) GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, AKBAR BHAVAN NEW DELHI-110 001, REPRENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, THE SECRETARY
3. MANIPAL ACADEMY OF HIGHER EDUCATION TRUST, MANIPAL, UDUPPY DISTRICT, KARNATAKA STATE REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, TRIVANDRUM 695037
R1&2 BY ADV. SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR,ASG OF INDIA R3 BY ADV. SRI.S.R.DAYANANDA PRABHU
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10-07-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
BP
WA.No. 197 of 2013 ()
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES :
ANNEXURE 1: CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN R.P. NO.980 OF 2012 IN WP(C)NO.7661/2009.
RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES : NIL.
//TRUE COPY//
P.A. TO JUDGE
BP
Manjula Chellur, C.J. & K.Vinod Chandran, J.
Writ Appeal No.197 of 2013 -------------------------------------------Dated this, the 10th day of July, 2013
J U D G M E N T
Manjula Chellur,C.J.:
The appellant claiming to be a Charitable Society set up by Overseas Indians applied for establishing/starting PIO/NRI University in pursuance of Ext.P2 notification. The 3rd respondent and others also applied for the said establishment of such University and submitted Expression of interest in terms of Ext.P2. It is not in dispute that 3rd respondent was cleared by the Cabinet and they were asked to submit a detailed project report. When matters stood at that stage, Ext.R3 dated 18.10.2010 was communicated, wherein, the advisory board while evaluating the detailed project report opined that more such universities which may be envisaged should be established; not in terms of a notification but under an act of Parliament as contrasted to the existing legislative framework (Section 3 of the UGC Act). It further makes clear that after the bill is enacted, fresh Expression of Interest would be invited for the proposed University. Therefore,
W.A No.197/2013 ::2::
Ext.P2 and consequent decisions including letter informing 3rd respondent about the decision to entrust the task of establishing the proposed university to them become infructuous and Government decided not to proceed further.
W.A No.197/2013 ::3::
challenge is to its claim as a Trust complying with the conditions laid down at Ext.P2.
W.A No.197/2013 ::4::
this stage when the legislation itself is not in existence it would not be proper to opine whether 3rd respondent would be eligible or not under the future legislation. So far as the present notification, it has become infructuous.
With these observations, the appeal is disposed of.
Sd/Manjula Chellur, Chief Justice
Sd/-
K.Vinod Chandran,
jma/
Judge.
//true copy//
P.A to Judge
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the appeal challenging the petitioner's eligibility should be decided when the underlying notification became infructuous.
Whether further course of action based on Ext.P7 remains viable when the legislative framework has changed.
Charitable Educational and Welfare Society
Government of India
The Screening Committee
Manipal Academy of Higher Education Trust
Manjula Chellur
K.Vinod Chandran
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
