Dismissed

Akshay P.Aji v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC21 Mar 2022WP(C)/2393/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners challenged a University notification requiring 47% marks for SEBC candidates versus 45% for OEC candidates for MBA admission. The Court held that relaxation extent is an administrative power of the University Academic Council. The differential treatment based on backwardness was neither illegal nor arbitrary, and the writ petition was dismissed.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was dismissed without any merit finding. The University's criterion requiring 47% marks for SEBC and 45% for OEC upheld.

Akshay P.Aji Vs State of Kerala — Education and Admissions | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH

¶4

MONDAY, THE 21^ST DAY OF MARCH 2022/30TH PHALGUNA, 1943

¶5

WP(C) NO. 2393 OF 2022

¶6

PETITIONERS:

¶7

1 AKSHAY P.AJI, S/O.MR.AJIKUMAR N., AGED 23 YEARS, PARIKKALATH HOUSE, THELLAKOM P.O., - 686 630, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.

¶8

2 KRIPAMOL A.J., D/O.JOHNY A.J., AGED 22 YEARS, ARASARKADAVIL HOUSE, PUNNAPPRA P.O., 688 004, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.

¶9

BY ADV RUBEN GEORGE ROCK

¶10

RESPONDENTS:

¶11

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

¶12

2 THE DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION , OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION, VIKAS BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

¶13

3 THE COMMISSIONER FOR ENTRANCE EXAMINATIONS, FIFTH FLOOR, HOUSING BOARD BUILDINGS, SANTHI NAGAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

¶14

4 MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, REP. BY IT'S REGISTRAR, PRIYADARSINI HILLS P.O., KOTTAYAM - 686 560.

¶15

5 PRINCIPAL, RURAL ACADEMY OF MANAGEMENT STUDIES, AYYAMPILLY, CHERAI,

¶16

WP(C) No.2393/2022

¶17

¶18

ERNAKULAM DISTRICT - 682 501.

¶19

6 ADMISSION SUPERVISORY COMMITTEE FOR PROFESSIONAL COLLEGES, PRASHANTHI BUILDINGS, M.P.APPAN ROAD, VAZHUTHACADU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 014, REPRESENTED BY IT'S SECRETARY.

¶20

7 ALL INDIA COUNCIL FOR TECHNICAL EDUCATION, NELSON MANDELA MARG, VASANTHKUNJU, NEW DELHI - 110 070.

¶21

BY ADVS.

¶22

SURIN GEORGE IPE JOSE JACOB SMT.MARY BENJAMIN, SC, ADMISSION SUPERVISORY COMMITTEE FOR PROF. COLLEGES SHRI.SAJITH KUMAR V., SC, ALL INDIA COUNCIL FOR TECHNICAL EDUCATION - AICTE SRI.P.G.PRAMOD, GOVERNMENT PLEADER(GP-50) JAZIL DEV FERDINANTO

¶23

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21.03.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C) No.2393/2022

JUDGMENT

Dated this the 21^st day of March, 2022

¶28

The petitioners, who have completed their Graduation and aspiring for admission to MBA Course for the academic year 2021-'23, are before this Court seeking to quash Ext.P1 to the extent it fixes the cut off marks required for admission to MBA Course in the colleges coming under the 4^th respondent as 47% marks in the qualifying examination.

¶29

The petitioners state that the 1^st petitioner graduated by securing 45.1% marks in B.Com from M.G. University. The 2^nd petitioner has got 45.5% marks in B.Com (Co-operation). The 5^th respondent-College comes under the 4^th respondent-University. The petitioners have been informed that as per the stipulations of the 4^th respondent-University, admission for OBC candidates is

¶30

WP(C) No.2393/2022

¶31

¶32

limited for students who have obtained 47% marks in the qualifying examination.

¶33

The petitioners submit that all leading Universities in Kerala, except the 4^th respondent, have stipulated 45% marks in qualifying Degree examination as eligibility criteria for MBA admission for OBC candidates. However, in Ext.P1 notification of the 4^th respondentUniversity, there is a further classification between SEBC students and OEC students. Due to this classification, SEBC students are given relaxation only upto 3% whereas OEC students are given relaxation of 5%. Therefore, in all other Universities, SEBC students who secure 45% marks are eligible for admission to MBA Course. In the 4^th respondent-University, a higher percentage is insisted.

¶34

The petitioners contended that SEBC communities and OEC communities, both fall under the category of OBC. In fact, 30 of the OBC communities have

¶35

WP(C) No.2393/2022

¶36

¶37

been separately categorised as OEC community. There cannot be any differential treatment between SEBC and

¶38

OEC. In all other Universities and even in the Kerala Management Aptitude Test (KMAT), which is conducted by the Government of Kerala, 45% marks is sufficient as qualifying marks for SEBC students.

¶39

The learned counsel for the petitioners urged that as all leading Universities in Kerala have stipulated 45% as the eligibility criteria for admission to MBA Course, the 4^th respondent-University is not justified in prescribing a higher percentage of mark. The Government of Kerala has included both OBC and OEC candidates in the same category SEBC in the entrance examination. When there is such categorisation, it is highly arbitrary to prescribe a lower relaxation for SEBC students comparing to OEC students.

¶40

WP(C) No.2393/2022

¶41

¶42

The 4^th respondent contested the writ petition

¶43

filing a Statement. The 4^th respondent submitted that the criteria for admission/eligibility for admission to any of the programmes offered by a University is decided by the Academic Council of the University. It is part of the academic autonomy of the University concerned. There is no rule which stipulates any prohibition in this regard. The University has been granting relaxation in such manner during previous years also.

¶44

The learned Standing Counsel for the 4^th respondent pointed out that SEBC list is prepared based on the report of Justice Kumarapilla Commission in 1965. In Kerala, the educational reservation is extended to SEBC students as per the said Commission Report. The notification for admission to MBA Course clearly states that merely appearing and qualifying in KMAT 2021 does not confer any right on the candidate for admission to MBA

¶45

WP(C) No.2393/2022

¶46

¶47

Course. The selection and admission to MBA Course is subject to fulfilling the admission criteria, eligibility and such other criteria as may be prescribed by the Government, Universities and Institutions.

¶48

I have heard the learned counsel for the

¶49

petitioners, the learned Government Pleader representing respondents 1 to 3 and the respective Standing Counsel appearing for respondents 4 to 7.

¶50

The grievance of the petitioners is that in the matter of admission to MBA programme offered by the MG University, the University has prescribed differential standards for candidates falling under the OBC category.

¶51

The relevant part of Ext.P1 notification reads as follows:

¶52

• “Candidates who have passed qualifying examinations from other Universities/Institutions and not approved by the University shall not be admitted unless eligibility certificates are produced.

¶53

• Candidates belonging to SEBC and OEC are allowed a concession of 3% and 5% marks respectively in the prescribed minimum marks for admission to the above programme.

¶54

WP(C) No.2393/2022

¶55

¶56

• All candidates admitted to MBA programme shall produce original degree certificates before the commencement of first semester examinations.”

¶57

Due to the above provision, candidates who belong to SEBC will have to obtain 47% marks for admission whereas OEC candidates need only 45% in the qualifying examination. According to the petitioners, there is no significant difference between the communities falling under SEBC and OEC communities.

¶58

This Court finds that relaxation to be granted to backward communities and the extent to which relaxation has to be granted, are matters falling under the administrative powers of the University. The University Academic Council has considered the matter and found that while SEBC students can be granted relaxation of 5% and OEC students 3%. OEC candidates are clubbed with Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, in the matter of relaxation of qualifying standards.

¶59

¶60

WP(C) No.2393/2022

¶61

The Academic Council of the 4^th respondentUniversity found that members falling under OEC community require a relaxation upto 5%. This Court do not find any illegality or arbitrariness in 4^th respondentUniversity deciding so.

¶62

It is to be noted that the OBC list is prepared primarily for the purpose of employment. Relaxation of marks for the purpose of admission to authorised courses are left to be decided by the Universities concerned. The 4^th respondent-University being an autonomous body, this Court is of the view that the University can very well prescribe a lower standard for OEC communities who are more backward in comparison to the communities falling under SEBC list.

¶63

The 4^th respondent-University has provided separate relaxation standards for SEBC and OEC students. The 4^th respondent-University will be within its powers to do

¶64

WP(C) No.2393/2022

¶65

¶66

so. There is no illegality, arbitrariness or discrimination in

¶67

the matter.

¶68

The writ petition is therefore without any merit and it is

¶69

dismissed.

¶70

Sd/- N. NAGARESH JUDGE

ncd/22.03.2022

WP(C) No.2393/2022

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 2393/2022

¶75

PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS

¶76

Exhibit P1	A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION DATED
	16/10/2021 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P2	A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF APPROVAL PROCESS HANDBOOK 2021-2022 OF AICTE.
Exhibit P3	A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION DATED 25/05/2021 ISSUED BY UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT.
Exhibit P4	A TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED 23/08/2018 ISSUED BY APJ ABDUL KALAM KERALA TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY.
Exhibit P5	A PHOTOCOPY OF THE NOTIFICATION DATED 16/07/2021 ISSUED BY THE COMMISSIONER FOR ENTRANCE COMMISSIONER.
Exhibit P6	A PHOTOCOPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF PROGRAM STRUCTURE AND SYLLABUS FOR MBA PUBLISHED BY 4TH RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P7	A PHOTOCOPY OF THE KERALA STATE SOCIALLY AND EDUCATIONALLY BACKWARD CLASSES (SEBC)' LIST.
Exhibit P8	A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 04/12/2021 SUBMITTED BY 1ST PETITIONER.
Exhibit P9	A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION
	DATED 04/12/2021 SUBMITTED BY 2ND PETITIONER.

Akshay P.Aji v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Akshay P.Aji 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

Issac Kurian @ Shaji, Vs State of Kerala

Christian Association and Alliance for Social Action(Casa) Vs State of Kerala

Arya J Nadh Vs Regional Director

Biju P. Vs Dr. Balpreeth Singh IAS

Mr. Haridas C.N Vs State of Kerala

M/S. Western Marine Engineering, Vs State of Kerala