Allowed

The Secretary - K. Velayudhan Memorial Trust v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC16 Jan 2023WP(C)/708/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a writ petition contesting the denial of college affiliation for B.Voc courses due to a lack of NAAC score. The court observed no formal rejection order existed and directed the competent authority to reconsider the matter within six weeks, specifically addressing the petitioner's contention that the applicable policy did not cover self-financing colleges for differently abl

What did the court decide?

Directed the competent Government authority to hear the petitioner and pass an appropriate order on affiliation within six weeks, giving specific attention to the petitioner's contention regarding the

The Secretary - K. Velayudhan Memorial Trust Vs… — Education and Admissions | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

¶4

MONDAY, THE 16^TH DAY OF JANUARY 2023 / 26TH POUSHA, 1944

¶5

WP(C) NO. 708 OF 2023

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

THE SECRETARY - K. VELAYUDHAN MEMORIAL TRUST, P. B. NO. 13, CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA, KERALA, INDIA, PIN - 688524 BY ADVS. ASWIN GOPAKUMAR ANWIN GOPAKUMAR ADITYA VENUGOPALAN NIKITHA SUSAN PAULSON MAHESH CHANDRAN

¶8

RESPONDENTS:

¶9

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION - GOVERNMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001

¶10

2 PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT HIGHER EDUCATION (B) DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001

¶11

3 UNIVERSITY OF KERALA SENATE HOUSE CAMPUS, PALAYAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695034 REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR.

¶12

4 THE UNIVERSITY GRANTS COMMISSION (UGC) BAHADUR SHAH ZAFAR MARG, NEW DELHI, PIN - 110002 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN BY ADV SRI.THOMAS ABRAHAM SMT.PARVATHY.K - GP

¶13

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16.01.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

WP(C)No.708 of 2023

¶15

: 2 :

¶16

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, J. ========================= W.P.(C) No.708 of 2023

¶17

========================== Dated this the 16^th day of January, 2023

¶18

JUDGMENT

¶19

The petitioner is stated to be the Secretary of an Educational Agency, running a College; and he impugns Ext.P6 proceedings of the Government, whereby, the College has been denied affiliation for conducting B.Voc Degree in IT and Diploma in Gems and Jewellery Designing, solely for the reason that they had not attained a score of 2.5 under the National Assessment and Accreditation Council (NAAC).

¶20

Smt.Nikitha Susan Paulson – learned counsel for the petitioner, vehemently argued that, as is evident from Ext.P6, the requirement for a College to obtain the minimum score of 2.5 under the NAAC has been stipulated by the Government, through Ext.P7, only in the case of Aided Colleges and no other. She pointed out that, her client's College is not an Aided one, but is in the self-financing sector; and resultantly, that Government could not have rejected their request for

¶21

WP(C)No.708 of 2023

¶22

: 3 :

¶23

affiliation, merely because they had not attained the afore score.

¶24

Smt.Nikitha Susan Paulson, thereafter, explained that, the College in question caters to differently abled students and is enjoying the permission of Rehabilitation Council of India (RCI), and that it has also been given the permission to conduct the course in question for the year 2020-21 by the University Grants Commission (UGC), as luculent from Ext.P5. She alleged that, these aspects have not been considered by the Government in its proper perspective, but have chosen not to deny affiliation to the College solely because they have not attained the aforesaid score of 2.5 under NAAC. She thus prayed that, Ext.P6 be set aside and Ext.P7 be declared not to apply to her client; thus consequentially, directing the Government to grant the College approval for the courses in question, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.

¶25

Smt.Parvathy Kottol – learned Government Pleader, opposed the afore submissions saying that, through Ext.P7, Government have taken a policy decision mentioned therein with the sole intent to improve the quality in higher education,

¶26

WP(C)No.708 of 2023

¶27

: 4 :

¶28

and that only Colleges with a NAAC score of 2.5 and above will be allowed to start B.Voc course from 2019-20. She argued that, therefore, this being a policy decision, the petitioner cannot challenge it.

¶29

Even when I hear the learned Government Pleader on the afore lines, the fact remains that there are no formal orders of the Government rejecting the petitioner's request for affiliation. Ext.P6 is not such an order, but it is only one which calls upon the petitioner to inform whether the College had obtained the minimum score of 2.5 under the NAAC.

¶30

This is crucial, because the contentions of the petitioner, that the College does not require to obtain the score of 2.5 under the NAAC; and that they have the permissions from the RCI and UGC – it catering to differently abled students – have not been considered in any manner whatsoever until now.

¶31

I am, therefore, of the certain view that entire matter will require to be reconsidered by the Government, after hearing the petitioner and taking note of their specific contention that Ext.P7 would not apply to them.

¶32

¶33

: 5 :

¶34

Resultantly, I allow this writ petition, directing the competent Authority of the Government to hear the petitioner; thus culminating in an appropriate order and necessary action on the request for affiliation, as expeditiously as is possible, but not later than six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶35

To reiterate, while completing the afore exercise, the competent Authority will specifically advert to the contention of the petitioner that Ext.P7 has been issued only with respect to B.Voc courses in Aided Arts and Science Colleges, as is evident from its title.

¶36

Sd/DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE

anm

: 6 :

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 708/2023

¶41

PETITION	ER EXHI	BITS
Exhibit	P-1	A TRUE COPY OF THE 09.04.2012 BEARING AC.B/03/045906/2011 NO.3	CERTIFICATE DATED NO. ISSUED BY RESPONDENT
Exhibit	P-2	A TRUE COPY OF THE 30.04.2013 BEARING 182/2010(CPP-1/C) I NO. 4 TO RESPONDENT	LETTER DATED NO. F. NO. 8- SSUED BY RESPONDENT NO. 3
Exhibit	P-3	A TRUE COPY OF THE 27.11.2018 BEARING COMPLAINTS/UGC-SWRO RESPONDENT NO. 4	LETTER DATED F. NO. 2-41/ /2018-19 ISSUED BY
Exhibit	P-4	A TRUE COPY OF THE RESPONDENT NO. 4 CA	BROCHURE CIRCULATED BY LLING FOR APPLICATIONS
Exhibit	P-5	A TRUE COPY OF THE GRANTING APPROVAL T CONDUCT OF B. VOC D DIPLOMA IN GEMS AND BY RESPONDENT NO. 4	EMAIL DATED 23.09.2020 O THE COLLEGE FOR EGREE IN IT AND JEWELLERY DESIGNING
Exhibit	P-6	A TRUE COPY OF THE 26.10.2022 BEARING ISSUED BY RESPONDEN	LETTER DATED NO. B3/314/2022-HEDN T NO. 2
Exhibit	P-7	A TRUE COPY OF THE GO (MS) NO. 126/201 08.05.2019 ISSUED B	GOVERNMENT ORDER NO. 9/HEDN DATED Y RESPONDENT NO. 1
Exhibit	P-8	A TRUE COPY OF THE 22.02.2017 ISSUED B AND ACCREDITATION C	CERTIFICATE DATED Y NATIONAL ASSESSMENT OUNCIL.

¶42

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : NIL

The Secretary - K. Velayudhan Memorial Trust v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Secretary - K. Velayudhan Memorial Trust 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

C.Maneesh Vs Kerala State Road Transport Corporation Ksrtc

Dr.P.T Sebastian Vs Chitralekha

B.Vijayan Vs Joint Registrar of Co-Operative Societies (General)

P.Prabhakaran., Vs Kerala Co-Operative Tribunal

Hussan P T Vs Mukkam Service Cooperative Bank Ltd.

Sivakumar R Vs Kerala State Road Transport Corporation Ksrtc