Dismissed

University of Kerala, v. Patriach Elias Charitable Society

Kerala HC14 Aug 2020WA/1061/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ appeal by the University of Kerala against an interim order directing it to include a college in its admission portal was dismissed. The court held that the Single Judge did not act illegally in allowing admissions while a statutory application to rectify land status under the Paddy and Wetland Act remained pending.

What did the court decide?

The writ appeal challenging the interim order was dismissed; the order remains in force.

University of Kerala, Vs Patriach Elias Charitable… — Education and Admissions | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.MANIKUMAR

¶4

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY

¶6

FRIDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF AUGUST 2020 / 23RD SRAVANA, 1942

¶7

WA.No.1061 OF 2020

¶8

AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 03.08.2020 IN WP(C) 15504/2020(K) OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA

¶9

APPELLANT/1ST RESPONDENT:

¶10

UNIVERSITY OF KERALA,

¶11

REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, OFFICE OF THE UNIVERSITY OF KERALA, PALAYAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 034.

¶12

BY ADV. SRI.THOMAS ABRAHAM, SC, UNIVERSITY OF KERALA

¶13

RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER AND RESPONDENTS 2 TO 6:

¶14

1 PATRIACH ELIAS CHARITABLE SOCIETY REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, KURUVILA GEORGE, CHEVALIER THARAKAN BUILDING, HOSPITAL JUNCTION, KUNDARA-691 501.

¶15

2 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, HIGHER EDUCATION 4TH FLOOR, ANNEX 11, GOVT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001.

¶16

3 AGRICULTURAL OFFICER/CONVENOR, LOCAL MONITORING COMMITTEE UNDER PADDY AND WETLAND ACT, PAVITHRESHWARAM, KOLLAM-691 507.

¶17

4 REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, PUNALUR THALUK OFFICE, 1ST FLOOR, MINI CIVIL STATION, PUNALUR-691 305.

¶18

5 VILLAGE OFFICER,

¶19

PAVITHRESHWARAM, KOLLAM-691 507.

¶20

6 PAVITHRESHWARAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PAVITHRESHWARAM, KOLLAM691 507.

¶21

R1 BY SRI.C.UNNIKRISHNAN(KOLLAM) R2 TO R5 BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SURIN GEORGE IPE

¶22

THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14.08.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶23

W.A. No. 1061/2020

¶24

: 2 :

¶25

Dated this the 14^th day of August, 2020.

¶26

JUDGMENT

¶27

SHAJI P. CHALY, J

¶28

The captioned writ appeal is filed by the first respondent in W.P.(C) No. 15504 of 2020 challenging the interim order dated 03.08.2020 passed by the learned single Judge, whereby the appellant University was directed to forthwith include the name of the college of the writ petitioner in the admission portal of the appellant University to enable the aspirants to apply for admission to various arts and science degree courses in the college of the writ petitioner. The interim order was granted by the learned single Judge on finding that the college has been functioning for the last four years in an extent of 3.40 acres of property, which is a dry land, evident from Ext.P4 land use certificate issued by the Pavithreswaram Grama Panchayat, Kollam and that further proceedings for correction of the Basic Tax Register is pending consideration before the statutory authority.

¶29

The paramount contention advanced by the appellant University is that if the direction issued by the learned single Judge is complied with, it would result in thwarting the continuous attempts made by the appellant University to compel the writ petitioner educational agency to comply with the basic requirement

¶30

W.A. No. 1061/2020

¶31

: 3 :

¶32

for granting affiliation. It is also submitted that even though five long years have elapsed since the college was granted provisional affiliation on the solemn assurance given by the management that defects noted would be rectified, the management has not taken any steps to rectify the defects. It is also pointed out that as per Ext.P6 letter dated 24.04.2019, the management has undertaken to initiate necessary steps to purchase adjacent land of adequate measurement within a period of one year to comply with the land requirements as prescribed by the University; but the management has failed to comply with the said undertaking also. Therefore, the sum and substance of the contention put forth by the appellant University is that the learned single Judge has not taken note of the relevant and material aspects before passing the interim order.

¶33

We have heard Sri. Thomas Abraham, learned counsel for the appellant University, Sri. Surin George Ipe, the learned Senior Government Pleader, and Sri. C. Unnikrishnan, the learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner, and perused the pleadings and documents on record.

¶34

On evaluation of the facts and circumstances, we find that the direction sought for in the writ petition is to include the name of the petitioner college in the portal of the University for the current academic year. It is also clear from the pleadings put forth by the

¶35

W.A. No. 1061/2020 : 4 :

¶36

writ petitioner that since the appellant University has issued Ext.P3 show cause notice dated 09.04.2019 and Ext.P7 communication dated 24.06.2019, there was a likelihood of not including the college of the writ petitioner in the University portal for conducting admissions to various degree courses for the ensuing year 20202021.

¶37

From Ext.P3 show cause notice, what we could gather is that the defect pointed out by the appellant University is that, in spite of the direction issued to the writ petitioner to produce records to prove that the land of the college is a dry land or substitute with the dry land, the same was not complied with by the writ petitioner. It was in that background that Ext.P3 show cause notice was issued by the appellant directing the writ petitioner to show cause why the provisional affiliation granted to the college should not be withdrawn as per the provisions of the University first statute, 1977. Presumably, a reply was given by the writ petitioner seeking time to rectify the said defect and it was accordingly that Ext.P7 communication dated 24.06.2019 was issued by the University granting time to the writ petitioner till 31^st march, 2020 to fulfil the land requirements adhering to norms relating to wet land, failing which fresh admissions for the year 2020-2021 was decided not to be granted. It is evident from Ext.P4 land certificate issued by the

¶38

W.A. No. 1061/2020 : 5 :

¶39

Grama Panchayat that the property of the writ petitioner admeasuring 1 Hectare, 71 Ares and 57 sq. meter situated in Block no. II of Survey Nos. 364/12, 364/13/2, 364/6/2, 361/5, 361/7/2 361/1, 360/2/2, 360/2/3, 360/3, 361/2, 361/3, and 361/6 is not an agricultural land and as such it is suitable to be used for educational purpose. It is also clear from Ext.P5 communication dated 02.05.2019 issued by the Revenue Divisional Officer, Punalur, Kollam District addressed to the Agricultural Officer and Convenor of the Local Level Monitoring Committee as per the provisions of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy and Wetland Act, 2008 ('the Act, 2008' for short) that the writ petitioner has taken steps to secure orders for utilisation of the property for other purposes other than paddy cultivation and agricultural operations. It is also evident from the documents accompanied with Ext.P5 communication that an application is filed by the writ petitioner on 02.05.2019 apparently under the provisions Section 27A of Act, 2008 specified above. Therefore, it is quite clear and evident that the constructions were carried out by the writ petitioner in a converted dry land. However, in the revenue records, the property is remaining as paddy field. It was for rectifying that defect, the writ petitioner has submitted a statutory application under Section 27A of the Act, 2008, which is admittedly pending consideration. Since the learned counsel for

¶40

W.A. No. 1061/2020 : 6 :

¶41

the appellant University has strenuously contended that the property where the college is situated is a paddy land in accordance with the revenue records maintained by the State and if the writ petitioner is permitted to conduct the admission without rectifying the defect, the defect would continue for ever, we are inclined to refer to Section 27A of the Act, 2008, which is a provision incorporated into the Act, 2008 on and with effect from 30.12.2017 enabling an owner of an unnotified paddy field to utilise such land for residential or commercial or for other purpose by securing orders from the Revenue Divisional Officer in such manner as may be prescribed. Rules are formulated in terms of the Act, 2008 in the year 2015 and modalities are prescribed to consider the applications filed accordingly. Therefore, it is for the said statutory authority to take into account all the relevant aspects and take a decision in the said application, which would enable the writ petitioner to take appropriate steps for correcting the revenue records as provided under Section 27C of the Act, 2008, thus incorporating additional details in respect of the present condition of the land.

¶42

Therefore, appreciating the materials on record, we are of the view that it cannot be said that the interim order passed by the learned single Judge directing the appellant University to include the college of the writ petitioner in the portal for admission to various

¶43

W.A. No. 1061/2020

¶44

: 7 :

¶45

degree courses for the ensuing year 2020-2021 is illegal or erroneous, justifiable to be interfered, invoking the powers conferred under Section 5 of the Kerala High Court Act, 1971.

¶46

Needless to say, writ appeal fails and accordingly, it is dismissed.

¶47

Sd/-

¶48

S. MANIKUMAR, CHIEF JUSTICE.

¶49

Sd/SHAJI P. CHALY, JUDGE.

¶50

¶51

W.A. No. 1061/2020 : 8 :

¶52

APPENDIX

¶53

APPELLANT'S ANNEXURES:

¶54

ANNEXURE A1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE HEARING BY THE STANDING COMMITTEE OF THE SYNDICATE ON AFFILIATION OF COLLEGE. ANNEXURE A2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT AND THE FORWARDING LETTER SENT BY THE EDUCATIONAL AGENCY. ANNEXURE A3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE SYNDICATE HELD ON 25.5.2019.

¶55

RESPONDENTS' ANNEXURES: NIL

¶56

/True Copy/

¶57

PS to Judge.

¶58

University of Kerala, v. Patriach Elias Charitable Society

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

University of Kerala, v. Patriach Elias Charitable Society

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Anju Kishor T. Vs the State of Kerala

Centre for Consumer Education Vs Kerala State Election Commission

Jibiri Kannu Vs Chief Secretary, State of Kerala

T.a.Majeed Vs State of Kerala

Apj Abdul Kalam Technological University Vs Holy Grace Foundation

Thasneem S.P Vs State of Kerala