AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Devan Ramachandran, J.
The petitioner impugns Ext.P15, through which, the Mahatma Gandhi University (M.G. University) has informed them that since there are discrepancies in the Survey Numbers of the properties on which their Educational Institution is situated, they cannot be allowed to register the students admitted with them, unless the earlier orders of the National Council for Technical Education (NCTE) are appropriately corrected.
The petitioner says that they have already explained that the afore required corrections are unnecessary, through Ext.P17; but that, instead of considering the same in its proper perspective, M.G. University is still harping upon the same objections in Ext.P15, thus prejudicing their students irreparably.
Sri.Kurian George Kannamthanam – learned Senior Counsel, instructed by Sri.P.M.Saneer – learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, explained that several rounds of litigations have already been completed between the parties in this case; and he pointed out to Ext.P7 judgment of this Court, whereby, the order of the M.G. University dated 03.11.2022, was recorded and consequential directions issued to them to afford his client all necessary benefits. He pointed out that while doing so, this Court has also specifically said that the stipulation in the order of the University dated 30.10.2022 (which has been produced as Ext.P12 along with W.P(C)No.35305 of 2022 – from which Ext.P7 judgment culminated) – be not taken into account. The learned Senior Counsel asserted that, therefore, the present stand of the M.G. University in Ext.P15 is illegal and unlawful.
Sri.Surin George Ipe – learned Standing Counsel for the M.G. University, however, submitted that the factum of the survey numbers of the properties, offered by the petitioner while seeking affiliation, being different and inconsistent, was never made available to his client's attention until Ext.P15 order had been issued. He added that, it was also not brought to the notice of this Court when Ext.P7 judgment was delivered; and therefore, that petitioner cannot rely upon the declarations therein to find fault with his client. He then submitted that, his client is now facing a practical difficulty, in as much as the orders of the NCTE rely upon certain properties, while the title documents of the same – which are presented before his client – record it differently. He, however, conceded that petitioner has preferred Ext.P17 explanation and offered that it will be considered and disposed of by his client without any avoidable delay.
When I evaluate and consider the afore submissions, it is without doubt that petitioner has replied to the objections raised by the University in Ext.P15, through Ext.P17; and that there are no orders on it until now. However, it is stated that the last date for registering the students of the petitioner was 16.01.2023; and it is submitted by their learned Senior Counsel that any further delay would be cataclysmic because the examinations are to start from 23.01.2023.
I am, therefore, of the firm view that students of the petitioner cannot be put to prejudice and that they must be protected, because, finally, even if there is any error in the affiliation granted to the petitioner, such students will have to be either relocated or protected otherwise; for which purpose, their remedies will have to be kept open. This is more so because the students have admittedly committed no mistake and they have been admitted as per valid orders of the University.
In the afore circumstances, I allow this writ petition, with the following directions:
(a) The competent Authority of the M.G. University will hear the petitioner and take a decision on Ext.P17, as expeditiously as is possible.
(b) In the meanwhile, the petitioner will be allowed to register their students; for which purpose, the online portal will be kept open by the M.G. University, so that they can then write the examinations on 23.01.2023. The petitioner is also granted permission to submit the fees for each of the students, during the said process.
(c) I make it clear that, even if the affiliation of the petitioner is to be found in error in future, the rights of the students against the same or to seek other reliefs, as may be warranted, are left open.