Alwyn Alexander v. University of Kerala and Others

**WP(C) NO. 7841 OF 2022 1** **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V THURSDAY, THE 24[TH] DAY OF MARCH 2022 / 3RD CHAITHRA, 1944** **WP(C) NO. 7841 OF 2022** ## **PETITIONER/S:** ALWYN ALEXANDER, ALNA, TC 20/1888 (1) THAMALAM, POOJAPPURA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 012. BY ADVS. K.P.SATHEESAN (SR.) P.MOHANDAS (ERNAKULAM) GOKUL D. SUDHAKARAN SABU PULLAN S.K.ADHITHYAN K.SUDHINKUMAR ## **RESPONDENTS :** 1 UNIVERSITY OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, UNIVERSITY BUILDINGS, PALAYAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 034. 2 MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERISTY, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, PRIYADARSINI HILLS P.O., KOTTAYAM 686 560. 3 GIRIDEEPAM INSTITUTE OF ADVANCED LEARNING, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL, BETHANY HILLS, VADAVATHOOR P.O. KOTTAYAM 686 010. 4 THE CHAIRMAN, ADMISSION SUPERVISORY COMMITTEE FOR PROFESSIONAL COLLEGES IN KERALA, TC 15/1553-4, PRASANTHI BUILDINGS, M.P. APPAN ROAD, VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 014. BY ADVS. SRI.THOMAS ABRAHAM, SC, UNIVERSITY OF KERALA SRI. JOSEPH T.JOHN SRI. SURIN GEORGE IPE, SC, MG UNIVERISTY Smt. Mary Benjamin **WP(C) NO. 7841 OF 2022 2** THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24.03.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: **WP(C) NO. 7841 OF 2022 3** ## **JUDGMENT** The petitioner is aggrieved by the order passed by the 4th respondent withholding his admission to the MBA Course which he is presently pursuing at the Girideepam Institute of Advanced Learning, the 3rd respondent herein. He has approached this Court seeking to quash Ext.P4 issued by the 2nd respondent and for a further direction to the 4th respondent to regularize the admission granted to the petitioner and for a declaration that he is entitled to pursue his MBA course. ## 2. Short facts are as under: The 3rd respondent is a management institute affiliated to Mahatma Gandhi University. The said institute conducts MBA Course in tune with the affiliation guidelines of the University. The petitioner, on the strength of the B.Com (Computer Application) Degree secured from the 1st respondent University, approached the 3rd respondent for admission to the MBA course. Admission to the MBA programme in the affiliated colleges of the University for the academic year 2021-2022 is governed by a notification dated 16.10.2021 issued by Mahatma Gandhi University. As per the notification, the eligibility for admission is as follows: **WP(C) NO. 7841 OF 2022 4** Eligibility: A pass in any Bachelor's Degree Examination of Mahatma Gandhi University or an equivalent degree from any other University duly recognised by Mahatma Gandhi University with not less than 50 % marks in the aggregate for all parts of Examination or a Master's Degree with 50% marks in aggregate in addition to qualifying KMAT/CMAT/CAT. Under grading system, C grade of Mahatma Gandhi University or equivalent thereto from other recognized Universities with not less than 50% marks in aggregate is required to become eligible for admission. It is the responsibility of the Director/Principal to ensure that eligibility criteria is strictly observed in the admission procedure. For SC/ST Students, a pass in any Bachelors Degree Examination is needed. The Reservation Rules are applicable as per the Government and University norms in all the affiliated colleges. Those who are awaiting final semester results can also apply. 3. The petitioner contends that he had secured a total mark of 1987 out of the 3900 marks for the B.Com degree examination, which is more than 50% marks in the aggregate, as is evident from Ext.P3. As the petitioner was qualified as per the notification, he was granted admission by the 3rd respondent for the MBA Programme. While he was undergoing his studies, the 2nd respondent sought clarification from the 4th respondent pointing out that the Vice Chancellor of the University has issued orders to the effect that the percentage of marks calculated on the basis of total marks of the candidate can be taken into account while regularising the admissions given **WP(C) NO. 7841 OF 2022 5** to students for the MBA Programme. It appears that the Admission Supervisory Committee was of the view that it is not the aggregate percentage of marks secured by the student which was relevant for his eligibility but the CCPA (Cumulative Credit Point Average) of the student converted into percentage marks. If the CCPA secured by the student was taken into account and converted as percentage, the petitioner had secured only 49.98%. When the admission was withheld, Ext.P3 letter was issued by the 3rd respondent to the Registrar pointing out that there was no justification in withholding the admission and requested whether the admission can be regularised. In response, Ext.P4 communication was issued by the Registrar to the Principal pointing out that though the initial stand of the University was that the aggregate marks secured by the candidate can be considered for eligibility, the Vice Chancellor has reconsidered the criteria and has taken the view that the grade percentage conversion method has to be adopted. The petitioner having secured a CCPA of 4.977, by adopting the Grade Conversion Method, he was found to have secured only 49.77% marks. The petitioner was, therefore, found not entitled to pursue his MBA course. 4. In the statement filed by the 1st respondent, it is stated that the simple and conventional system of calculating the percentage of marks directly from the total marks has been dispensed with ever since the inception of the CBCS (Choice Based Credit and Semester) System, where credits were **WP(C) NO. 7841 OF 2022 6** assigned to each paper (termed course) and credits and credit points of each paper (course) form the basis of assessing the performance of the candidate for a course, semester and finally the programme. The marks scored as such do not mathematically reflect in assessing the performance or percentage in respect of the candidate. It is also stated that in view of the above stipulations as borne out from the Regulations which were produced as Annexure R1(a) the University can no longer do the calculations in the simple conventional method considering the marks secured and the maximum marks alone. In view of the above, the petitioner has secured an overall CCPA 4.977 and the corresponding percentage at 49.77% which has been shown in the consolidated credit card issued to the candidate. 5. In the affidavit filed by the Principal of the college it is stated that in Exhibit R3(a) notification, it has been categorically stated that for getting admission to the MBA program a candidate should pass in any Bachelor’s Degree Examination of Mahatma Gandhi University or an equivalent degree of any other University duly recognized by Mahatma Gandhi University with not less than 50% marks in aggregate or a Master’s Degree with 50% marks in aggregate and it was based on Ext.R3(a) that the 3rd respondent had granted admission to the petitioner in MBA program. It is also stated that Ext.R3(a) notification had been circulated among colleges affiliated to Mahatma Gandhi University. It is also submitted that it was after the classes **WP(C) NO. 7841 OF 2022 7** of six months had over, Ext.P4 letter was issued which is clearly against Ext.R3(a). 6. Sri. Surin George Ipe, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the M.G University would refer to the statement filed by the Kerala University and it is submitted that the percentage of marks secured by the student is just 49.77% and in that view of the matter, the University was justified in withholding the admission. It is submitted that it was only after granting admission to the student by the 3rd respondent that his mark lists were forwarded to the University. 7. I have heard Sri.K.P.Satheesan, the learned Senior counsel as instructed by Sri. P Mohandas, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Sri.Thomas Abraham, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 1st respondent, Sri.Surin George Ipe, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent, and Sri. Joseph T. John, the learned counsel appearing for the 3rd respondent and Smt. Mary Benjamin, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 4th respondent. 8. I have considered the submissions advanced. Ext.R3(a) is the notification issued by Mahatma Gandhi University wherein the eligibility for securing admission for the MBA programme 2021-2022 has been detailed. As per the eligibility criteria, a student who has secured a pass in any Bachelor's **WP(C) NO. 7841 OF 2022 8** Degree Examination of Mahatma Gandhi University or an equivalent degree from any other University duly recognised by Mahatma Gandhi University with not less than 50% marks in the aggregate for all parts of Examination or a Master's Degree with 50% marks in aggregate in addition to qualifying KMAT/CMAT/CAT, was eligible. Under the grading system, a person securing C grade or equivalent from the MG University or equivalent thereto from other recognized Universities with not less than 50% in the aggregate is also entitled to admission. From Ext.P1 mark list issued by the 1st respondent University, it can be seen that he has secured a total marks of 1987 out of the 3900 marks for the B.Com degree examination which is more than 50% marks in the aggregate as is evident from Ext.P3. In Ext.P4 communication issued by the Registrar of University to the Principal of the College, it is clearly stated that the ASC had sought clarification from the University and they had responded that admissions can be granted by calculating the aggregate marks secured by the student. This communication was issued on 28.2.2022 much after the grant of admission to the petitioner. As per the eligibility condition issued by the University, the petitioner was clearly eligible. It was much later that the Vice Chancellor had taken a decision that the grade percentage conversion method should be adopted. 9. It is by now settled that the rules of the game and the criteria for selection cannot be altered by the authorities concerned in the middle or after **WP(C) NO. 7841 OF 2022 9** the process of selection has commenced (See **Tej Prakash Pathak & Others v. Rajasthan High Court & Others** [(2013) 4 SCC 540]. The petitioner, the Institution as well as the University had interpreted the eligibility criteria to mean that a student who has secured 50% marks in the aggregate for all parts of the qualifying examination was eligible. In that view of the matter, there cannot be any justification on the part of the respondents in changing the rules of the eligibility after admitting the student and after the student had pursued a substantial portion of the course. In that view of the matter, Ext.P4 cannot be sustained. In view of the discussion above, Ext.P4 will stand quashed. There will be a direction to the 4th respondent to regularise the admission granted to the petitioner for the MBA course in the 3rd respondent institution. The respondents shall permit the petitioner to pursue the course in the 3rd respondent College. This writ petition will stand allowed. ## **Sd/-** **RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V JUDGE** NS **WP(C) NO. 7841 OF 2022 10** ## **APPENDIX OF WP(C) 7841/2022** PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS : - Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE MARK LIST ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE IST RESPONDENT UNIVERSITY FOR THE B COM. COURSE. - Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER WRITTEN BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 29.01.2022. - Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER WRITTEN BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 1.2.2022. - Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO. 16625/AC A42/2022/AC A4 DATED 28.02.2022 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT. Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION NO. 42372/EA/1/3/2019/EA1 DATED 13/03/2022 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT UNIVERSITY. Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE LIST OF STUDENTS DECLARED AS ELIGIBLE BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT UNIVERSITY FORWARDED ALONG WITH EXHIBIT-P5 TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT(S) EXHIBITS : Exhibit R1(a) TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF REGULATIONS RELATING TO THE FIRST DEGREE PROGRAMMES IN AFFILIATED COLLEGES, 2013. Exhibit R3(a) TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION ISSUED BY 2ND RESPONDENT ON 16.10.2021. Exhibit R3(b) TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT ON 13.3.2022.