Director, Mookambika College of Pharmaceutical Sciences & Research v State of Kerala, LBS Centre for Science & Technology, Kerala University of Health Sciences, Admission Supervisory Committee for Professional Colleges, Director of Medical Education

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU MONDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF OCTOBER 2016/11TH ASWINA, 1938 WP(C).No. 26203 of 2016 (A) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER : - ---------------------- THE DIRECTOR, MOOKAMBIKA COLLEGE OF PHARMACEUTICAL SCIENCES & RESEARCH, MANNATHOOR, MUVATTUPUZHA - 686 667. BY ADVS.SRI.KURIAN GEORGE KANNANTHANAM (SR.) SRI.T.R.KANNAN SRI.ALEX GEORGE (CHAMAPPARAYIL) RESPONDENTS:- ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, HEALTH & FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM - 695 001. 2. LBS CENTRE FOR SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, TRIVANDRUM - 695 001. 3. THE KERALA UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, TRICHUR - 680 596. 4. THE ADMISSION SUPERVISORY COMMITTEE FOR PROFESSIONAL COLLEGES, REPRESENTED BY ITS MEMBER SECRETARY, VAZHUTHAKKAD, TRIVANDRUM - 695 014. 5. THE DIRECTOR OF MEDICAL EDUCATION, MEDICAL COLLEGE P.O., TRIVANDRUM - 695 011. R1, R5 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. T. BIJOY CHANDRAN R2 BY ADV. SMT.K.K.RAZIYA, SC, LBS CENTRE R3 BY SRI.P.SREEKUMAR,SC,KERALA UTY. OF HEALTH SCIENCES R3 BY ADV. SRI.P.SHAJI JACOB R4 BY SMT.MARY BENJAMIN, SC, ADMISSION SUPERVISORY COMMITTEE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03-10-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 26203 of 2016 (A) --------------------------------------- ## **APPENDIX** PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS : - ------------------------------------- - EXHIBIT P1 : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 12.11.2015 OF THE HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE (K) DEPARTMENT. - EXHIBIT P2 : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 30.04.2016 ISSUED BY THE AICTE. - EXHIBIT P3 : TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION DATED 10TH & 11TH JUNE 2016 OF THE PCI. - EXHIBIT P4 : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 24.06.2016 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. - EXHIBIT P5 : TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 22.07.2016 TO THE GOVERNMENT. - EXHIBIT P6 : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 03.08.2016 FROM THE 4TH RESPONDENT. - EXHIBIT P7 : TRUE COPY OF THE DRAFT NEWS PAPER ADVERTISEMENT DATED 04.08.2016 APPEARED IN THE JANMABHOOMI. EXHIBIT P8 : COPY OF CIRCULAR DATED 15.07.2016 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : - NIL. --------------------------------------- // TRUE COPY // P.A. TO JUDGE DMR/- ## **P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON** **& DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, JJ.** ---------------------------------------------------- ## **W.P. (C) No. 26203 of 2016** ---------------------------------------------------Dated this the 03[rd] day of October, 2016 ## **J U D G M E N T** ## P.R. Ramachandra Menon, J. The petitioner is a self-financing Institution who is running various courses in the field of Pharmacy. The Institution got Ext.P1 NOC from the Government, subject to the condition that 50% of seats shall be made available to be filled up on the basis of merit, sponsored by the Government/competent authorities. In the course of further proceedings, the petitioner also secured Ext.P2 approval from the All India Council of Technical Education for the B.Pharm course to be conducted for the academic year 2016-2017 with an intake of 50 students, Ext P3 approval of the Pharmacy Council and Ext.P4 is the provisional affiliation granted by the University concerned. The prospectus was submitted before the Admission Supervisory Committee, who approved the same as per Ext.P6; pursuant to which, relevant notification was issued by the petitioner as borne by Ext.P7. 2 W.P. (C) No. 26203 of 2016 2. The grievance of the petitioner is that the Government has not considered the application preferred by the petitioner for granting 'LOP' (Letter of Permission); by virtue of which, the 2[nd] respondent, who is the allotting agency, has not included the petitioner to be considered for the 'Centralized Allotment Process' in respect of the 50% seats in the Government quota. This made the petitioner to approach this Court by filing the writ petition with the following prayers: “(i) Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate order or direction to direct the 2[nd] respondent to include the petitioner's College for spot allotment and to allot students to petitioner's College, on the basis of their options. (ii) To issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate order or direction to direct the first respondent to issue their LOP, sufficiently in time, so as to enable the LBS to make allotments to petitioner's College for B.Pharm Course in 2016. (iii) To declare that the petitioner will be entitled to make admissions to the total seats, if the LBS does not make allotments sufficiently in time. W.P. (C) No. 26203 of 2016 3 (iv) To declare that petitioner will be entitled to make admissions to the whole or any seats in the 50% of seats set apart for Government allotment, if the same is not filled up based on allotment by the LBS. (v) To declare that to start the college, petitioner does not require the LOP of the Government. (vi) Grant such other reliefs as are just and proper in the nature of this case.” 3. We have heard Sri.Kurian George Kannanthanam, the learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner, the learned Senior Government Pleader who entered appearance on behalf of the respondents 1 and 5, Smt.K.K.Raziya, the learned standing counsel for the 2[nd] respondent, Sri.P.Sreekumar, the learned standing counsel for the respondent University and Smt.Mary Benjamin, the learned standing counsel for the Admission Supervisory Committee. 4. After detailed discussions, with reference to the law declared by the Supreme Court in **[Jaya Gokul Educational Trust v. Commissioner and Secretary to Government [(2000) 5 SCC 231]** and by a Division W.P. (C) No. 26203 of 2016 4 ## Bench of this Court in **St.Joseph Hospital Trust v. Kerala University of Health Sciences [2012 (4) KLT 444]** , an interim order was passed for redressal of the grievance, by causing the name of the petitioner to be considered in the 'spot allotment' process. The operative portions of the interim order as contained in paragraphs Nos.13, 14 and 15 are extracted below: “13. In the result, there will be an interim order directing respondents 1 to 3 to take necessary steps to include the name of the petitioner's college provisionally for the spot allotment in terms of Para.9.9 of the Prospectus for admission to Professional Degree Courses, 2016 to B.Pharm Course for the academic year 2016-17 and to allot students to 50% Government merit seats, if necessary by inviting fresh options from the students included in the rank list prepared by the 2[nd] respondent, who are yet to get allotment against Government merit seats in any other Institutions in the State. Such allotment of students shall be made on or before 11.8.2016. If no such allotment is made to the 50% seats set apart under Government merit quota before 11.8.2016, it W.P. (C) No. 26203 of 2016 5 would be open to the petitioner to fill up those seats from the candidates included in the list prepared by the 2[nd] respondent on the basis of their inter-se merit. 14. The filling up of seats under Management Quota shall be made strictly in terms of the approval granted by the Admission Supervisory Committee and in accordance with the prospectus approved by the said Committee. 15. It is made clear that the admissions made pursuant to this order will be provisional and subject to the approval of the Admission Supervisory Committee and also the further orders to be passed in this Writ Petition, which shall be duly informed to the students.” 5. Despite the fact that the said order was passed six weeks back, no counter affidavit has been filed from the part of the respondents; nor has anybody come up before this Court referring to 'prejudice', if any, cause to such party, because of the interim order. It is also brought to the notice of this Court that the interim order was given effect to from the part of the Government as well as other authorities concerned. W.P. (C) No. 26203 of 2016 6 In the above circumstances, nothing further survives to be considered by this Court. We find it appropriate to make the interim order absolute. It is ordered accordingly and the writ petition stands disposed of. **P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE** **DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU JUDGE** DMR/-