Minor V. Akshiya vs Tamil Nadu Agricultural University

V. Ramasubramanian, J.—The petitioner has come up with the above writ petition seeking a mandamus to direct the first respondent to instruct the second respondent to grant admission to her to B.Sc. Agriculture course under the management quota, without insisting on the on-line application form.

Heard Mr. C. Mahendran, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Abdul Saleem, learned counsel for the first respondent-University and Mr. D. Balaraman, learned counsel for the second respondent-College.

As per the decision taken by the Academic Council of the University in its 120th meeting held on 6.4.2013, new rules of procedure for admission to Under Graduate and Diploma programmes have been issued. The new rule, which came into force on 6.4.2013, makes it clear that all applications, both for admission through single window counselling as well as under the management quota, will have to be submitted only on-line.

There is also an object behind the said prescription. The object is that at times, unqualified students are admitted under the management quota and while granting approval, the University faces lot of pressure. Sometimes the disqualification of candidates is also overlooked by the University. Therefore, the self-financing colleges are obliged to follow the new rule of procedure for admission as per the Academic Council''s decision dated 6.4.2013. This is insofar as the law on the point is concerned.

But it appears on facts that the second respondent-College has now one seat left to be filled up under the management quota. According to the learned counsel for the second respondent, all seats to be filled up under single window counselling had been filled up properly and all but one seat to be filled up under the management quota have also been filled up through on-line. However, one seat is left vacant.

Therefore, there are two alternatives. One to follow the letter of the law and leave the one academic year for the petitioner a waste and leave one seat for the second respondent to go waste. The second is to make an exception, without making it a precedent. Since the second alternative will benefit the institution as well as the individual, the writ petition is disposed of directing the first respondent, as an exceptional case, to approve the admission of the petitioner to the second respondent-College without insisting on the on-line application. However, it is made clear that in future years, any application submitted by anyone, otherwise than through on-line, cannot be entertained by any self-financing college affiliated to the first respondent University. The first respondent shall publish this information widely to its constituent colleges, so that nobody pleads ignorance of the rule. Consequently, M.P. No. 1 of 2014 is closed. No costs.