Datatec Computer Engineering College v. Karnataka State Open University

Case Details & Bench

Court: High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges: Shaji P. Chaly
Judgment Date: 2017-06-19
Court Decision / Holding: Writ petitions are allowed; KSOU is directed to issue the necessary certificates to the students who pursued distance education through the petitioners at the earliest possible time, and in any case within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
Final Disposition: Writ petitions allowed; directions issued to KSOU to issue certificates within two months.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

Datatec Computer Engineering College, Pulimude Junction, Mavelikkara P.O., Alappuzha, Kerala

Respondents

Karnataka State Open University, Mukthagangotri, Mysore

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

• Sri A. Rajasimhan
• Sri K. Nirmalan

Counsels for Respondents

• Sri P. A. Mohammed Shah, SC

Case Synopsis & Summary

The Kerala High Court, in a batch of writ petitions including Datatec Computer Engineering College, challenged the Karnataka State Open University’s (KSOU) stoppage of admissions in distance education and its refusal to issue certificates to students who had completed diploma and degree courses under KSOU’s programs. The court recalls the Supreme Court’s Yeshpal decision (Prof. Yeshpal and others v. State of Chhattisgarh and others, AIR 2005 SC 20126) directing UGC to regulate distance education offered outside a university’s jurisdiction, and notes KSOU’s Ext.P3 notification stopping admissions with effect from 2.8.2014. Despite compliance by collaborators and study centers, KSOU allegedly discontinued the courses, prompting Ext.P4 (the court’s earlier judgment) directing: (i) a list of students and courses for those admitted up to 30.8.2014; (ii) alternate arrangements for examination or transfer; (iii) compensation of Rs. 3,00,000 per affected student if certificates could not be issued; (iv) applicability only to petitioners. The petitioners allege that students completed studies between 2011 and 2014, but KSOU has not issued diploma or migration/transfer certificates. KSOU argues that UGC directives, based on the Yeshpal judgment, render post-judgment collaborations illegal and bar issuance of certificates. The judge concludes the matter is squarely covered by Ext.P4 and directs KSOU to issue necessary certificates to the students at the earliest, and in any event within two months of this judgment. Writ petitions are allowed.

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioners contended that KSOU had already carried out the courses for 2011–2014 and that, notwithstanding Ext.P3/Ext.P4 directions, the University must issue the necessary certificates, including provisional and final certificates, migration and transfer certificates, to the students who completed the programs; they urged adherence to the earlier directions in Ext.P4 to finalize admissions, or compensate those affected, and to ensure certificate issuance without undue delay.

Contentions of Respondents

KSOU submitted that it is bound by the UGC directives derived from the Supreme Court’s Yeshpal decision and that post-judgment collaborations with study centers are illegal; thus, it could not issue the disputed certificates.

Cited Precedents (2)

Case Name	Citation	Treatment	Explanation
Prof. Yeshpal and others v. State of Chattisgarh and another	AIR 2005 SC 20126	Positive	Cited as the Supreme Court decision leading to UGC directives stopping distance education outside jurisdiction.
W.P.(C). No.12540/2017	W.P.(C).No.12540/2017	Positive	Relied upon as Ext.P4 judgment guiding relief for certificate issuance to affected students.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT:** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY** **MONDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF JUNE 2017/29TH JYAISHTA, 1939** ## **WP(C).No. 12540 of 2017 (N)** **----------------------------** **PETITIONER :** **---------------------** **DATATEC COMPUTER ENGINEERING COLLEGE, PULIMUDE JUNCTION, MAVELIKKARA P.O., ALAPPUZHA, PIN-690 101 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR NIZARUDEEN.J.** ## **BY ADVS.SRI.A.RAJASIMHAN SRI.K.NIRMALAN** **RESPONDENT :** **------------------------** **KARNATAKA STATE OPEN UNIVERSITY, MUKTHAGANGOTRI, MYSORE, PIN-570 006 REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR.** **BY SRI.P.A.MOHAMMED SHAH,SC** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19-06-2017,ALONG WITH WP(C).NO.12133 OF 2017 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** **sts** **WP(C).No. 12540 of 2017 (N) ---------------------------------------** ## **APPENDIX** **PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS --------------------------------------EXHIBIT P1: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DT. 2.4.2011 EXHIBIT P2: TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION DT. 5.3.2016 EXHIBIT P3: TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION DT. 8.8.2014 EXHIBIT P4: TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC NO.19782/2015 DT. 13.12.2016 EXHIBIT P5: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DT. 12.4.2016 EXHIBIT P6: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DT. 23.3.2016 EXHIBIT P7: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DT. 23.3.2016 EXHIBIT P8: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DT. 15.3.2016 EXHIBIT P9: TRUE COPY OF THE TOTAL LIST OF STUDENTS RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: NIL -------------------------------------------/TRUE COPY/ P.S.TO JUDGE** **sts** ## **SHAJI P. CHALY, J.** ----------------------------------------------- ## **W.P.(C). Nos.12133, 12507, 12516, 12529, 12531, 12535 and 12540 of 2017 ----------------------------------------------Dated this the 19[th] day of June, 2017** ## **JUDGMENT** The aforesaid writ petitions are connected materially and substantially in respect of the various diploma and degree courses conducted by the Karnataka State Open University, who is the respondent in all the writ petitions. Petitioners are approved study centers, except the petitioner in W.P.(C) No.12133/2017, who is a collaborator of the respondent University for conducting various diploma courses in Kerala. Therefore, I heard them together and propose to pass a common judgment. 2. Brief facts for the disposal of the writ petitions are as follows; pursuant to the law declared by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in **Prof.Yeshpal and others v. State of Chattisgarh and another** [AIR 2005 SC 20126], the distance education conducted by the universities all over India outside its jurisdiction were directed to be stopped by the UGC. W.P.(C). No.12540 & con. cases 2 Accordingly, as per Ext.P3 notification, respondent University stopped further admission with a cut off date of 2.8.2014. Though the collaborators and institutions complied with the above conditions, the respondent university discontinued the courses illegally. The subject matter was under challenge before this court and Ext.P4 judgment was rendered by this court making the following directions: i) The petitioners in the above writ petitions shall give the list of students and the courses which they have attended with all particulars, and whose names appear in the list furnished prior to 30.8.2014, to the University within a period of one month from today. ii) On receipt of the same, University shall make alternate arrangements for the continued study of such candidates and if they have completed the course, arrangements shall be made for such students to write the examinations in any of the recognized colleges in the State of Karnataka. iii) If it is not possible for the University to continue the course or to permit the students to write the examinations, the University shall compensate such students by paying a sum of W.P.(C). No.12540 & con. cases 3 Rs.3,00,000/- (Rupees three lakhs only) each. iv) The benefit of the order shall be available only to candidates who are petitioners in any of the above cases.” 3. According to the petitioners, the students of the petitioners have completed the courses during the year 2011 to 2014. Admittedly, prior to the issuance of Ext.P3 order by the respondent University dated 8.8.2015, it is stated that, the Academic Council of the respondent University has taken a decision to withdraw Gate Course, Bridge Course, Degree Bridge Courses, In-house programmes of the University and all types of Technical and Para-Medical programmes operated by the Academic Council of the respondent University. It is also stated, if admissions have been carried out for the above mentioned programmes from collaborative institutions till 2.8.2014, related details of course wise students list should be sent to Registrar (Admission) of the respondent University within 30.8.2014. It is further stipulated that, Academic Collaborative Institutions fail to follow the instruction, then W.P.(C). No.12540 & con. cases 4 the university cannot be held responsible for any consequences. However, evident from Ext.P4 judgment, this court upheld the rights of those students, who were pursuing their studies on the cut off date of 2.8.2014 and directed the University to either complete the course or to pay compensation. 4. The paramount grievance advanced by the petitioners in these writ petitions is that, now the University is not issuing diploma certificate including provisional and final, migration and transfer certificate to the students who have already completed and passed the decree and diploma courses. 5. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent University and perused the pleadings and the documents on record. 6. Learned counsel for petitioners reiterated the contentions raised in the writ petitions. However, learned Standing Counsel appearing for the University submitted that, W.P.(C). No.12540 & con. cases 5 in view of the imperative direction issued by the UGC on the basis of the judgment rendered by the Apex Court in **Prof.Yeshpal and others** (supra), the University is bound to follow the directives of the UGC. The UGC has directed the University that, the agreements executed after the judgment rendered to above, by the University with Collaborators and study centers are all illegal and against the directives contained in the aforesaid judgment. Therefore, the University is unable to issue the certificates as is sought for by the petitioners in the writ petitions. 7. Having evaluated the situations and summersing the issue raised by the petitioners, I think the issue is squarely covered by Ext.P4 judgment in W.P.(C) No.12540/2017. Petitioners are also entitled to get the similar treatment at the hands of the University especially due to the fact that, the students under the petitioners in these writ petitions have all completed the courses during the year 2011 to 2014 and the only thing remains to be carried out by the respondent W.P.(C). No.12540 & con. cases 6 University is, issuance of necessary certificate to the petitioners. 8. Reckoning all these facts and circumstances, there will be a direction to the respondent University to issue necessary certificates to the students, who have prosecuted the distance education programme through the petitioners at the earliest possible time, and at any rate within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Writ petitions are allowed accordingly. Sd/- **SHAJI P. CHALY JUDGE** smv 20.6.2017