AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
P. Jyothimani, J
Heard Mr. K.M. Vijayan, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. A. Navaneethakrishnan, learned Advocate General, who
represents the learned counsel for the first respondent.
The writ petitioner, which is a private College of Education, was originally affiliated to Periyar University, Salem and they have been running
classes both Arts and Science classes as well as the education classes. When the first respondent university has come into existence under a statute
in the year 2008, namely under the Tamil Nadu Teacher Education University Act, 2008, by virtue of one of the provisions of the said Act, all the
powers, which were in existence with the college, by virtue of its affiliation to first respondent University, stood transferred and stated to continue
and it was accordingly, the petitioner institution is stated to have continued the affiliation under the first respondent-University. However, under the
impugned order, the first respondent-University has withdrawn the affiliation from the academic year 2011-12 on the basis there has been some
deficiencies found by two-member Inspection Commission, which is stated to have visited the college on 13.9.2011. As it is seen in the impugned
order of the first respondent -University, the following are the found to be the deficiencies:
(i) No language laboratory
(ii) Ladies staff room without adequate furniture
(iii) No furniture and water facilities in the Physical Science Lab.
(iv) Nine class rooms in the first floor are without furniture''s
(v) The library is not having adequate furniture, no journals and magazine were subscribed.
(vi) The books are shared by B.Ed and D.T.Ed students
(vii) No logbook is maintained in the Library. (viii)The Psychology Lab is inadequate
(ix) Space for play ground is found, earmarked but it is not presented for outdoor games.
(x) Drinking water facilities are found inadequate
(xi) Staff rooms for male and female teachers were found without adequate furniture.
(x) Drinking water facilities are found inadequate.
(xi) Staff rooms for male and female teachers were found without adequate furniture.
(xii) No restroom for women with adequate facilities.
(xiii) Canteen and Hostel facilities re not found.
(xiv) Faculty members for subjects Tamil, English, Maths, Physical Science, Biological Science, Computer Science, economics, Commerce and
History are appointed on the day of inspection only.
(xv) The Principal''s 10 years of experience certificate is not endorsed by due Regional Director of Collegiate Education, Karnataka.
(xvi) The Principal also had joined duty only on the day of Inspection.
(xvii) In the address at 242/2 Sentharipatti Main Road, Thammampatti, Salem, Annai Teresa Arts and Science College affiliated to Periyar
University is functioning.
(xviii) Website for Annai Teresa College of education is not found in the internet.
(xix) Both Biology lab and Physical Science lab were found in the same hall (20x45 ft). Adequate apparatus for the both labs were found without
water facilities and furniture.
There is one admitted fact that the first respondent University came into existence by virtue of power conferred u/s 54 of the Tamil Nadu
Teacher Education University Act, 2008. Admittedly, there are no guidelines or regulations framed so far in respect of the first respondent
University. It appears that the first respondent University is following the guidelines followed by other universities including that of the Periyar
University.
Mr. K.M. Vijayan, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner would fairly submit that the 19 items, which are stated in the impugned
order are actually compliable in nature and according to him, all the requirements are available as on date.
The submission made by the learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner institution in our considered view to be very fair. Therefore, we
are of the view that the first respondent University may give the exact particulars required in respect of 19 items and give sufficient time so as to
enable the petitioner institution e to comply with such requirements.
Mr. A. Navaneethakrishnan, learned Additional Advocate General would submit that it must be made clear that the infrastructure which are
used by the petitioner institution for Arts and Science College cannot be permitted to be used for educational use also. Certainly it is appreciable
and there is no doubt that there must be separate infrastructure between two different institutions namely Arts and Science College as well as the
Education College.
The learned Advocate General would submit that the first respondent University within the time limit, which may be fixed by this court, would
write to the writ petitioner about the actual requirements in order to comply with the requirements required by the first respondent University, in
which event, as argued by the learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner, the same will be complied with within a specified time and
thereafter the first respondent University can inspect and find out as to whether the compliance have been effected.
In view of the above, the writ petition stands disposed of with the following directions:
(i) The first respondent University shall communicate to the petitioner about the actual requirement in respect of 19 items by making specific
quantification in respect of the requirements for running the educational college within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of
this order.
(ii) On receipt of such communication from the first respondent University, the petitioner shall comply with the requirements within a period of three
weeks thereafter.
(iii) After the expiry of the said period of three weeks, the first respondent University shall conduct inspection to find out as to whether the
compliance have been effected.
(iv) On compliance of the said conditions, it is open to the first respondent University to consider the application of the petitioner institution for
affiliation from the academic year 2012-2013 onwards.
(v) It is made clear that it is only after such affiliation granted by the first respondent University from the academic year 2012-2013, the petitioner
institution shall admit students and continue the course.
No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.