Abin Peter v. Principal Muhammed Abdurahman Memorial Orphanage College & Ors.

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL** **TUESDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2020 / 21ST ASWINA, 1942** ## **WP(C).No.21211 OF 2018(B)** ## **PETITIONER/S:** **ABIN PETER AGED 26 YEARS, S/O.PETER, CHAKKIATH HOUSE, THABORE P.O., THABORE, ERNAKULAM-683 577,IV SEM. M.C.J., REGISTER NO.OMAQMCJOO2, ENROLMENT NO.105301173.** **BY ADVS. SRI.G.SANTHOSH KUMAR (P). SRI.FRANCO T.J. SRI.V.R.SASSIDHARAN** ## **RESPONDENT/S:** **1 THE PRINCIPAL MUHAMMED ABDURAHMAN MEMORIAL ORPHANAGE COLLEGE MANASSERY P.O., MOKKAM, KOZHIKODE-673 602.** **2 THE VICE-CHANCELLOR UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT, THRISSUR-CALICUT ROAD, CALICUT UNIVERSITY P.O., THENHIPALAM, MALAPPURAM-673 635.** - **3 THE CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATIONS UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT THRISSUR-CALICUT ROAD, CALICUT UNIVERSITY P.O.,THENHIPALAM, MALAPPURAM-673 635.** - **4 THE REGISTRAR UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT THRISSUR-CALICUT ROAD, CALICUT UNIVERSITY P.O.,THENHIPALAM, MALAPPURAM-673 635.** ## **R2-4 BY ADV. SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13.10.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** **WP(C).No.21211 OF 2018(B)** **2** ## **JUDGMENT** ## **Dated this the 13[th] day of October 2020** The question raised in the writ petition is whether the B.Tech degree awarded by the petitioner through IGNOU University is equivalent qualification in the Calicut University in view of the letter dated 5.5.2004 issued by the UGC. 2. The petitioner is student of IVth Semester M.C.J (Mass Communication and Journalism) in Muhammed Abdulrahman Memorial Orphanage College, Kozhikode. The petitioner received a call letter from the department of Journalism and Mass Communication intimating his inclusion in the provisional rank list of M.C.J Entrance Examination, 2016 and was directed to report at the office with certain documents. The course started on August 2016 and the petitioner was permitted to sit in the I and II Semester Examinations provisionally as equivalency certificate was necessary for the 2nd respondent University ie., University of Calicut since the petitioner had secured **WP(C).No.21211 OF 2018(B)** **3** B.Tech from IGNOU. Issuance of provisional hall ticket issued by the 3rd respondent to the petitioner for the II Semester M.C.J Examination is evidenced from Ext.P3. 3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that University Grants Commission (UGC) vide its circular No.F1-52/2000 (CPP-II) dated 5.5.2004 had informed all the Registrars of Indian Universities to treat the Degree/Diploma certificates awarded by the open universities in conformity with the UGC notification on specification of Degrees as equivalent to the corresponding awards of the traditional universities in the country, Ext.P4 and vide Ext.P5 circular, it has been stated that the certificate, Diploma and Degrees awarded by IGNOU are to be treated equivalent to the corresponding courses of the Universities in the Country. Vide communication of UGC dated 14.10.2013, Ext.P6, all the Registrars of Indian Universities were intimated to treat the Degrees/Diplomas/Certificates awarded by the open universities as equivalent to the corresponding awards of the traditional universities in the country. 4. The Head of the Department of the 1st **WP(C).No.21211 OF 2018(B)** **4** respondent college vide letter dated 20.2.2017 requested the Registrar of IGNOU to provide B.Tech Degree syllabus attestation in order to provide equivalency certificate to the petitioner, Ext.P7. The petitioner after remitting the challan fee submitted his application on 15.3.2017. As the petitioner was denied hall ticket for the III Semester M.C.J Examination due to non-production of equivalency Certificate, the petitioner was constrained to approach this Court by filing W.P.(C) No.470 of 2018. This Court vide interim order dated 5.1.2018 permited the petitioner to participate in the examination of III-Semester provisionally and with a condition that the result shall not be published. The writ petition was disposed of vide judgment dated 11.1.2018, directing the respondents to consider Ext.P8 and pass orders in the light of Exts.P4, P5 and P6 within a period of six weeks. Pursuant to Ext.P10 judgment, the Deputy Registrar, Calicut University informed the petitioner that the Board of Studies of the Calicut University had decided to reject the request of the petitioner for equivalency certificate on the ground that as per regulations 2009 of University of Calicut, the eligibility **WP(C).No.21211 OF 2018(B)** **5** criteria for admission to B.Tech Degree course in Calicut University was not fulfilled by the petitioner. Accordingly, the claim of the petitioner was rejected vide Ext.P11. 5. The petitioner had obtained B.Tech Degree in Electronics and Communication Engineering from IGNOU as revealed by Ext.P1. The IV th semester examination was on 2.7.2018. The petitioner preferred the present writ petition and vide interim order dated 27.6.2018, permitted the petitioner to appear for the fourth semester examination provisionally, subject to the result of the writ petition petitioner need not be published without orders from this Court. Ext.P11 order rejecting the candidature of the petitioner by the Deputy Registrar, University is illegal, unsustainable as the petitioner had already under gone verification of documents, screening and interview by University of Calicut for the IV th and V th semester. Even though Ext.P10 judgment, direction was issued to consider Ext.P8 application but the Board of University failed to consider the same. Exts.P4 and P6 circular issued by the UGC clearly states that the degrees awarded by the open universities to be equivalent in traditional universities in **WP(C).No.21211 OF 2018(B)** **6** the country, thus, the B.Tech Degree obtained through IGNOU can be treated as equivalent qualification. The reasoning assigned in impugned Ext.P11 of having not obtained 42% marks of mathematics is neither here and there in view of Ext.P12 where the University of calicut had issued a criteria for treating the degrees of various other colleges as equivalent to them and urged this Court for allowing the writ petition. 6. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondents 2 to 4. It is stated that Calicut University has already recognised all regular degrees of other State/Central Universities enacted by State Legislative Assembly/Parliament. But being a correspondence course, the course content, regulations and other related documents, etc., have been verified and scrutinized by the respective academic bodies of the University. The Academic Bodies of the University did not recognise the B.Tech degree in Electronics and Communication Engineering offered by IGNOU, Recognition/Equivalency it is that background Certificate could not be issued . The request of the petitioner dated 20.3.2017 for treating the **WP(C).No.21211 OF 2018(B)** **7** B.Tech degree from IGNOU to be equivalent was rejected vide Ext.P11 on the ground that as per the eligibility criteria for admission to B.Tech degree course is 50% marks in Mathematics and 50% marks in Physics, Chemistry and Mathematics put together in Higher Secondary Examination of State of Board of Kerala. After verification of the documents produced by the petitioner, it was found that he secured only 42% marks for Mathematics, thus failed to meet the eligibility condition at the entry level for admission to B.Tech Programme under University of Calicut. B.Tech degree in Electronics and Communication Engineering offered by IGNOU is not recognised by the University of Calicut and requested this Court for dismissal of the writ petition. It was also contended that Hon'ble Supreme Court in **Orissa Lift Irrigation Corp.Ltd.** v. **Rabi Sankar Patro & Others** (Civil Appeal Nos. 17869-17870 /2017) has laid down that a distant eduction courses in technical degrees cannot be recognised for seeking admission in other universities. 7. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and appraised the paper book. Ext.P12, the facts as **WP(C).No.21211 OF 2018(B)** **8** noticed above, that the petitioner having obtained B.Tech Degree in Electronics and Communication Engineering from IGNOU is not recognised. The relevant portion of Ext.P12 reads thus: **UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT (EQUIVALENCY AND MIGRATION SECTION) List of Recognised / Equalised Correspondence /Private/ Distance/Off Campus/Open/External Courses of other Universities prepared on 12.11.2015:** **Name of the Name of the Course Conditions & U.O University** **xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx IGNOU BA (Public Administration) Recognised for) Employment (Correspondence) only GA1/A1/6268/08 DT.12.8.09 B.Com (with 10+2 qualification Equivalent to B.com (Correspondence) GA1/A1/9629/2000 dt.12.10.01 B.Com (without basic qualification Recognition for Employment only (Correspondence) GA1/A1/9629/2000 dt.12.10.01 B.Sc. MLT (Correspondence) Equivalent to B.Sc MLT EQ&MG/2264/2015/Admn dt.6.3.15 BliSc (Correspondence) Equivalent to BLi Sc BEd. (2 Yrs) (Correspondence) Equivalent to BEd. GA1/A1/4517/2001 dt.22.11.02 MA history (Correspondence) Equivalent to MA History GA1/A1/5492/09 dt.07.02.2011 MA Population Studies Recognised for employment only (Correspondence)** **WP(C).No.21211 OF 2018(B)** **9** **MA Women Studies/Gender studies Recognised for purpose of M.Phil and & Ph.D programmes in Women's Studies only (EQ&MG/4121/2014/Admn dt 25.4.14 M.Com(Correspondence) Equivalent to M Com Condition; 45% marks in B.com/BBA compulsory EQ/MG/R/2946/2012 dt. 25.5.13 MCA (Correspondence) Equivalent to MCA EQ&MG/464/2012 dt. 18.10.2012 M LISc (Correspondence) Equivalent to M LISc Condition; BLISc recognised by Calicut University as basic qualification is compulsory (U.O No.EQ&MG/4121/2014 Admn dated 25.4.2014) MBA (Correspondence) Recognised for employment only other than teaching and Higher studies (U.O No.GAI/A1/7993/96 dated 12.3.1999)** 8. On perusal of the aforementioned, it is evident that various degrees have been treated as recognised and equivalent for the purpose of obtaining admission in post graduation courses but not B.Tech. The other reason assigned vide communication dated 24.4.2018, Ext.P11, was that the petitioner had obtained only 42 marks for mathematics. The relevant portion of the aforementioned letter reads thus: “With reference to the above, Sri. Abin Peter is informed that the meeting of the Board of Studies in Electrical, Electronics and Communication Engineering held on 10.04.2018 discussed matter of equivalency to B.Tech in Electronics and Communication Engineering of IGNOU with B.Tech degree in Electronics and Communication **WP(C).No.21211 OF 2018(B)** **10** Engineering of University of Calicut for study purpose. The Board verified the documents submitted by Sri.Abin Peter and found that the equivalency criteria are not fully satisfied by the candidate. As per regulations 2009 of University of Calicut, the eligibility criteria for admission to B.Tech degree course is 50% marks in Mathematics and 50% marks in Physics. Chemistry and Mathematics put together, in Higher Secondary Examination of State of Board of Kerala or examination recognised as equivalent by any Universities of Kerala. After verification of the documents produced by the candidate, the Committee found that he has secured only 42% marks for Mathematics and hence failed to meet the eligibility condition at the entry level for admission to B.Tech Programme under University of Calicut. Therefore, the Board observed that the equivalency criteria are not fully satisfied by the candidate. In view of the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala in W.P.(C) No.470/2018, the minutes of the Board of studies were urgently considered by the Dean, Faculty of Engineering. The Dean, has remarked that, as per the present equivalency norms of University of Calicut, equivalency certificate cannot be issued to Sri.Abin Peter and the decision of the BoS conforms to that. The Vice Chancellor has approved the remarks of the Chairman, Board of Studies in Electrical, Electronics and Communication Engineering as endorsed by the Dean. Faculty of Engineering. Hence Sri. Abin peter is informed that his request for equivalency certificate is rejected herewith.” 9. No doubt, the UGC had earlier been issuing circulars and orders treating the degrees obtained by certain colleges like IGNOU to be at par an **WP(C).No.21211 OF 2018(B)** **11** equivalent/recognized by the other Universities. But it cannot be treated as a sermon, as the regulations do not specify any courses; they are general directions. Concededly, petitioner is a Bachelor in B.Tech in Electronics and Communication Engineering, which is a technical course and a correspondence/distant education cannot be treated at par for the purpose of pursuing Master degree in Mass Communication and Journalism in the University of Calicut. The question with regard to non recognition of technical courses to the distance education/correspondence was pondered upon by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Orissa Lift Irrigation Corp.Ltd. (supra). The relevant portion of the judgment reads thus: “Technical education leading to the award of degrees in Engineering consists of imparting of lessons in theory as well as practicals. The practicals form the backbone of such education which is handson approach involving actual application of principles taught in theory under the watchful eyes of Demonstrators or Lecturers. Face to face imparting of knowledge in theory classes is to be reinforced in practical classes. The practicals, thus, constitute an integral part of the technical education system. If this established concept of imparting technical education as a qualitative norm is to be modified or altered and in a given case to be substituted by distance education learning, then as a concept the AICTE ought to have accepted it in clear terms. What parameters ought to be satisfied if the **WP(C).No.21211 OF 2018(B)** **12** regular course of imparting technical education is in any way to be modified or altered, is for AICTE alone to decide. The decision must be specific and unequivocal and cannot be inferred merely because of absence of any Guidelines in the matter. No such decision was ever expressed by AICTE. On the other hand, it has always maintained that courses leading to degrees in Engineering cannot be undertaken through distance education mode. Whether that approach is correct or not is not the point in issue. For the present purposes, if according to AICTE such courses ought not to be taught in distance education mode, that is the final word and is binding – unless rectified in a manner known to law. Even National Policy on Education while emphasizing the need to have a flexible, pattern and programmes through distance education learning in technical and managerial education, laid down in Para 6.19 that AICTE will be responsible for planning, formulation and maintenance of norms and standards including maintenance of parity of certification and ensuring coordinated and integrated development of technical and management education. In our view whether subjects leading to degrees in Engineering, could be taught in distance education mode or not is within the exclusive domain of the AICTE. The answer to the first limb of the first question posed by us is therefore clear that without the Guidelines having been issued in that behalf by AICTE expressly permitting degree courses in Engineering through distance education mode, the Deemed to be Universities were not justified in introducing such courses.” In my view, there is no substance in the contention of the petitioner. The impugned order Ext.P11 cannot be quashed much less any direction be issued to the respondents to treat the B.Tech degree in Electronics and Communication Engineering from IGNOU to be equivalent **WP(C).No.21211 OF 2018(B)** **13** for the purpose of pursuing course in Mass Communication and Journalism under the University of Calicut. The writ petition stands dismissed. **Sd/-** sab **AMIT RAWAL JUDGE** **WP(C).No.21211 OF 2018(B)** **14** ## **APPENDIX** ## **PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:** **EXHIBIT P1** **TRUE COPY OF THE PROVISIONAL CERTIFICATE DATED 25.02.2016 ISSUED BY IGNOU.** **EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE CALL LETTER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.** **EXHIBIT P3** **TRUE COPY OF THE PROVISIONAL HALL TICKET ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.** **EXHIBIT P4** **TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR DATED 05.05.2004 ISSUED BY THE UGC.** **EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR VIDE LETTER NO.F.18/92(CPP) ISSUED ON FEBRUARY 1992 ISSUED BY UGC.** **EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR VIDE LETTER NO.F.NO.UGC/DEB/2013 DATED 14.10.2013 ISSUED BY UGC.** - **EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 20.02.2017 ISSUED BY THE HEAD OF DEPARTMENT OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE REGISTRAR IGNOU.** **EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION ALONG WITH ITS CHALAN RECEIPT.** - **EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 10.03.2017 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT.** **EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 11.01.2018 IN W.P.(C) NO.470/2018 OF THIS HON'BLE TRIBUNAL.** - **EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMO DATED 24.04.2018 ISSUED BY THE DEPUTY REGISTRAR, UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT.** - **EXHIBIT P12 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE LIST OF RECOGNIZED UNIVERSITIES PREPARED ON 12.11.2015 AND PUBLISHED BY THE CALICUT UNIVERSITY.** **EXHIBIT P13 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 06.08.2020 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER, CMFRI, KOCHI.**