Calicut University Self-Financing Arts and Science College Mangements' Association v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC23 Aug 2022WP(C)/13582/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court addressed a writ petition challenging uniform fee norms enforced under the Calicut University Act. It directed the Government to evolve a permanent mechanism for differential fee fixation based on college infrastructure within four months, without disturbing existing fees immediately.

What did the court decide?

The Government must hear stakeholders and evolve a permanent mechanism for differential fee fixation within four months.

Calicut University Self-Financing Arts and Science… — Education and Admissions | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF AUGUST 2022 / 1ST BHADRA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 13582 OF 2022

¶5

PETITIONER:

¶6

CALICUT UNIVERSITY SELF-FINANCING ARTS AND SCIENCE COLLEGE
MANGEMENTS' ASSOCIATION
(C.S.M.A) REG NO.TSR/CA/124/2021, 4/460, MOTHER ARTS AND
SCIENCE COLLEGE, PERUVALLUR P O, THRISSUR-680508, REPRESENTED
BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY.

¶7

BY ADVS.
GEORGE POONTHOTTAM (SR.)
ARUN CHANDRAN
NISHA GEORGE
CHITHRA P.GEORGE
J.VISHNU
HANA KARNOLIA MADONA CYRIL

¶8

RESPONDENTS:

¶9

1STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY ITS ADDITIONAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER
SECONDARY EDUCATION, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.

¶10

2THE UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT
CALICUT UNIVERSITY P O, THENJIPALAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-
673635, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR.

¶11

BY ADV P.C.SASIDHARAN

¶12

ADV.RAMANAND-SR.GP

¶13

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
23.08.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

¶15

W.P.(C) No. 13582 of 2022.

¶16

JUDGMENT

¶17

Dated this the 23rd day of August, 2022 .

¶18

The petitioner is stated to be an Association of Management of Self-Financing Arts and Science College, affiliated to the University of Calicut; and they allege that their legitimate rights to manage and govern their Institutions have been illegally curtailed by the respondents, in an indirect manner, by fixing abysmally low fees for the various courses they are entitled to run.

¶19

Sri.George Poonthottam, learned Senior counsel instructed by Smt.Ann Maria Francis - learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that there is no mechanism yet evolved by the Government, or by the

¶20

¶21

W.P.(C) No. 13582 of 2022.

¶22

University, to assess and evaluate the infrastructural and educational facilities offered by each of the Colleges; but that without doing so, they fix arbitrary and unilaterally assessed fee, as a common one, for all Colleges. He argued that this has fostered inequity because Colleges offering much higher standards are forced to run on the exiguous amounts fixed by the Government; while those which offer inferior facilities would perhaps gain from such an exercise. He argued that this amounts to equating the unequals and then creating confusion in the minds of the students, because they would not be in a position to understand which College offers better facilities and which does not, though they are asked to fees on a uniform scale.

¶23

The learned Senior Counsel concluded his submissions asserting that, therefore, the Government

¶24

¶25

W.P.(C) No. 13582 of 2022.

¶26

must evolve a proper mechanism for assessment of fees of individual Colleges, diligently evaluating all their facilities and infrastructural asserts; adding that the University of Calicut merely adopts the fees structure suggested by the Government and publishes it, as is evident from Ext.P3.

¶27

Sri.P.C.Sasidharan - learned Standing Counsel for the University of Calicut, in response, submitted that a counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the 2^nd respondent, wherein, it has been explained that the affiliation fees and such other charges paid by the Colleges to the University are not renewed every year; and therefore, that they would not face an escalation of their expenses on an annual basis, as has been now alleged. He then argued that the Government has been considering the relevant social circumstances of the

¶28

¶29

W.P.(C) No. 13582 of 2022.

¶30

given times and have been issuing orders enhancing the fees structure from time to time; but conceded that the University has no role to play in this.

¶31

Sri.P.C.Sasidharan thereafter explained that, as per the Calicut University Act, 1975 (Act for short), the University has the power to fix and regulate the fees payable in Colleges and recognized institutions affiliated to it; however only with the previous sanction of the Government. He affirmed that, therefore, the University relies upon the Government for fixing the fees of the Colleges and that they merely publish it in their website, as and when it is done, as is the case of Ext.P3 also.

¶32

1. Sri.K.P.Ramanand learned Special Government Pleader, submitted that the Government has fixed the fee reflected in Ext.P3, after a great amount of thought and careful analysis of all the relevant

¶33

¶34

W.P.(C) No. 13582 of 2022.

¶35

aspects; and therefore, that the allegation of the petitioner, that it has been done in an arbitrary or capricious manner, is baseless and without any corroborating substantiation. He predicated that the students of the State have the right to study and therefore, that neither can they be subjected to usurious charges, nor can the Institutions be allowed to engage in profiteering, which the Government has very carefully ensured. He thus prayed that this writ petition be dismissed.

¶36

When I evaluate and assess the afore rival contentions, it is irrefragable that, one hand, the petitioner says that there is no viable mechanism evolved by the Government to fix the fee of individual Colleges, adverting to their infrastructural and other facilities and therefore, that an omnibus "common fee

¶37

¶38

W.P.(C) No. 13582 of 2022.

¶39

structure" is published, without ascertaining whether it is commensurated to the facilities provided by each individual College affiliated to the Calicut University; while, on the other hand, the Government says that a well caliberated fee structure requires to be maintained, so that Colleges and Institutions do not engage profitably or mischirious charge.

¶40

I must say that there is force in both the contentions as afore; and that a balance, therefore, will have to be brought in qua the rival positions.

¶41

To paraphrase, even when the Government has to ensure that there is no profiteering or other deleterious tendencies in structuring the fees of individual Colleges, it has to be borne in mind that such Institutions may be quite different from each other on the yardsticks of infrastructural and educational facilities

¶42

¶43

W.P.(C) No. 13582 of 2022.

¶44

provided by them to the students. Therefore, there cannot be a "one size fit all" arrangement by the Government in fixing fees; and certainly, the facilities offered by individual Institutions will have to be taken into account and reckoned for such purpose. This cannot be done by the Government on a case to case basis; and obviously, therefore, they will have to think about a permanent committee/mechanism to look into all germane aspects so as to fix the fee from time to time, depending upon the need for doing so. They can possibly draw parallel from the Admission and Fee Regulatory Committee constituted by it under the "Kerala Medical Education (Regulation and Control of Admission to Private Medical Educational Institutions) Act, 2017"; though I do not say that the said committee has the power to fix fees in the case of the Colleges involved in

¶45

¶46

W.P.(C) No. 13582 of 2022.

¶47

this writ petition.

¶48

In the afore circumstances, I am certain that the Government must hear the petitioner, as also all other stake holders in the matter and consider the establishment of a permanent mechanism for the purpose of fixing of fees for Undergraduate and Post graduate courses in the various Self Financing Arts and Sciences Colleges affiliated to the University of Calicut, as also to the various other Universities in Kerala.

¶49

I, however, make it clear that I have not affirmatively declared the manner or modus in which the Government should act, but that they must consider all aspects in its proper perspective and evolve a cogent method, so that the rival interests of the students and the Managements could be well countervailed and synergised effectively.

¶50

¶51

W.P.(C) No. 13582 of 2022.

¶52

This shall be done by the Government, resulting in an appropriate order, as expeditiously as is possible, but not later than four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶53

I make it further clear that the afore time frame has been peremptory fixed, taking note of the fact that the fees structure for the next year would have to be fixed soon thereafter.

¶54

After I dictated this part of the judgment, Sri.George Poonthottam - learned Senior Counsel, intervened to assert that, as far as this academic year is concerned, Ext.P3 imposes a very unfair fee structure.

¶55

I am afraid that I cannot find favour to immediately respond to the afore submissions of the learned Senior Counsel because, until such time as the Government completes the exercise ordered above, the fees structure

¶56

¶57

W.P.(C) No. 13582 of 2022.

¶58

now fixed by them through Ext.P3 cannot be disturbed by this Court.

¶59

Of course, the petitioner is at full liberty to approach the Government seeking modification of fee structure as reflected in Ext.P3; and if they are to do so, I leave it to the Government to consider it in terms of law, as they deem fit.

¶60

This writ petition is thus ordered.

¶61

Sd/- DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE

¶62

Raj. 23.08.2022.

¶63

¶64

W.P.(C) No. 13582 of 2022.

¶65

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 13582/2022

¶66

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶67

Exhibit P1TRUE COPY OF THE LIST OF MEMBERS
COLLEGES OF THE PETITIONER
ASSOCIATION.
Exhibit P2TRUE COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER G O
(MS) NO.209/2013/H.EDN DATED
29.05.2013
Exhibit P3TRUE COPY OF THE CALICUT UNIVERSITY
FEE STRUCTURE BEARING NOTIFICATION
NO.160799/DOA-ASST-7/2021/ADMN DATED
15.08.2021.
Exhibit P4TRUE COPY OF THE TABLE CONTAINING THE
FEES COLLECTED BY DIFFERENT STATES IN
THEIR SELF-FINANCING AND OTHER PRIVATE
COLLEGES.
Exhibit P5TRUE COPY OF THE SHORT TABLE
CONTAINING THE RANKS OF SELF FINANCING
AND THE FEES COLLECTED BY THEM.
Exhibit P6TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION GIVEN
BY THE PETITIONER ASSOCIATION BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MINISTER FOR HIGHER
EDUCATION DATED 16.11.2019.
Exhibit P7TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION GIVEN
BY THE PETITIONER ASSOCIATION BEFORE
THE CHAIRMAN, KERALA STATE UNIVERSITY

¶68

¶69

W.P.(C) No. 13582 of 2022.

¶70

LAW REFORMS COMMISSION DATED
18.12.2021.

¶71

RESPONDENT EXHIBITS

¶72

Exhibit R2(a)TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER
NO.U.O.NO.6785/2019/ADMN DATED
25.05.2019

Calicut University Self-Financing Arts and Science College Mangements' Association v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Calicut University Self-Financing Arts and Science College Mangements' Association v. State of Kerala

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

Smt. Mrinalini Vs Shri. Sajeesh

John T J Vs State of Kerala

Annie John, Vs Suresh Kumar

Sadanandan Pillai.K Vs State of Kerala

Shakuntala S Vs Axis Bank

Mohanan Nair Vs State of Kerala