MANJUSHA K G LEKHAS & USHA S. PATTASSERIL v. STATE OF KERALA & ORS

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL** ## **WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 3RD CHAITHRA, 1943** ## **WP(C).No.32007 OF 2013(A)** ## **PETITIONERS:** - **1 MANJUSHA K G LEKHAS, EZHIKKAKATHU JUNCTION, HARIPAD, ALAPPUZHA-690 514.** - **2 USHA S. PATTASSERIL, PLAPUZHA, HARIPAD, ALAPPUZHA-690 514. BY ADV. SHRI.P.SREEKUMAR** ## **RESPONDENTS:** - **1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 001** - **2 THE DIRECTOR DIRECTORATE OF HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION, HOUSING BOARD BUILDING, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 001** - **3 UNIVERSITY GRANTS COMMISSION REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, BAHADUR SHAH ZAFAR MARG, NEW DELHI-110 002.** - **4 MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, PRIYADARSHINI HILLS P.O., KOTTAYAM-686 560.** - **5 KERALA UNIVERSITY REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, PALAYAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 001** ## **WP(C).No.32007 OF 2013(A)** **2** **BY ADV. SRI.S.KRISHNAMOORTHY CGC BY ADV. SRI.VARUGHESE M.EASO, SC, M.G. UNIVERSITY BY DR.P.LEELAKRISHNAN, SC, M.G.UNIVERSITY BY SRI.THOMAS ABRAHAM, SC, UNIVERSITY OF KERALA BY ADV. SRI.S.KRISHNAMOORTHY, CGC BY SRI.ASOK M. CHERIAN, SC, M.G. UNIVERSITY BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE POONTHOTTAM,SC,KERALA UTY.** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** **WP(C).No.32007 OF 2013(A)** **3** ## **JUDGMENT** ## **Dated this the 24th day of March 2021** Challenge has been laid to the orders Exts.P4 and P5 dated 24.05.2013 of Mahatma Gandhi University whereby University declined to issue Eligibility Certificate to the petitioners on the ground that the said Course had not been recognised by the University. 2. The facts leading to the filing of the writ petition are, that petitioners had undergone post-graduation course in Botany conducted by the Directorate of Distance Education, Annamalai University and were awarded degrees Exts.P1 and P2. The degree issued by the Annamalai University is recognized in the State and the petitioners were of belief that the post graduate qualification granted by the Annamalai University is also recognised by the University in Kerala but their application for equivalency certificate submitted to the 4[th] respondent vide impugned decisions Exts.P4 and P5, was rejected. The 3[rd] respondent, University Grant Commission (UGC) issued a communication to the Association of Indian Universities dated 14.10.2013 vide Ext.P7 that the degree and Diploma certificate awarded for **WP(C).No.32007 OF 2013(A)** **4** programmes conducted by Open and Distance Learning Institutions, recognized by DEC (erstwhile) and UGC, in conformity with UGC notification should be treated as equivalent to the corresponding awards of the Degree/Diploma/Certificate of the traditional Universities/institutions in the country. State of Kerala vide Ext.P8 had way back in 1965 recognized the Degrees and Diplomas awarded by the Statutory Universities established by an Act of the Central or State Legislature or by other Institutions of higher learning recognized as Universities. On the basis of the aforementioned order, the Kerala Public Service Commission issued a circular dated 07.05.2005 to the effect that the qualification obtained under the Distant Education scheme could be accepted for employment including that of the teachers. 3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners submitted that petitioners had completed post-graduate course from Annamalai University, which is a Statutory University recognized by the UGC. The 4[th] and 5[th] respondents cannot discard the instruction given by the 3[rd] respondent in academic matters being against the import of the circular Ext.P8. The UGC has already vide communication Exts.P7 to P9 recognized the **WP(C).No.32007 OF 2013(A)** **5** qualification obtained under the Distant Education Scheme. 4. The 4[th] respondent, Mahatma Gandhi University opposed the prayer on the ground that it followed a wellhonoured academic principles and Rules in determining merit of the course, content of the degree of another University while granting recognition. Since both the petitioners do not hold postgraduation recognized by the University, they should have enquired matter of recognition of the degrees before joining Distant Education course. It is in that circumstances, the University rejected their application for Eligibility Test. No doubt UGC had issued communication to AIU and the Universities to recognize the courses of Open any Distance Learning mode but does not forbid any Universities from examining the merits of the course, contents of degree of other Universities while granting recognition. As per Section 25 (Xii) of the Mahatma Gandhi University Act, 1985, the Academic Council of the University is vested with the power to decide, which of the examinations of other Universities can be accepted as equivalent. The decision of the academic council is based upon the expert opinion tendered by the subject experts. The University had already recognised the **WP(C).No.32007 OF 2013(A)** **6** several distance education courses of other Universities after evaluating the quality of the scheme and syllabi. 5. Sri.S.Krishnamoorthy, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the UGC submitted that the State University is not authorized/competent to open study centres/off campus centres beyond the territorial jurisdiction of the State as per the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme court in _**Prof.Yashpal and Another v. State of Chattisgarh and Others [2005 (5) SCC**_ _**420].**_ Thus Ext.P7 would not be treated as a sermon for recognize the degrees in view of the dictum laid down in the judgment and urges this Court for dismissal of the writ petition. 6. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and appraised the paper book. In the judgment cited ( _supra_ ) it has been held that the extra territorial operation of the State enactment in the form of establishment of “off campus centre”, “off shore campus” and “study centres” in the light of the constitutional mandate as contained in Article 245(1) of the Constitution of India. It is the Parliament alone competent to make laws for the whole or any part of the territory of India and the Legislature of a State may **WP(C).No.32007 OF 2013(A)** **7** make laws for the whole or any part of the State. In the judgment cited ( _supra_ ) Chattisgarh enactment for opening the extra territorial operations or off campus center was held to be beyond the legislative competence. I am of the view that there is no force and merits in the contention of the petitioners as the degrees obtained by the petitioners are outside the territorial jurisdiction of the Annamalai University and against the mandate of judgment cited ( _supra_ ). There would have been a force had the petitioners undertaken the course from the centres under the territory of Annamalai University. There is no such pleading nor Exts.P1 and P2 reveals petitioners had undertaken their course within the territory of Annamalai University. The communications of UGC to AIU and other Universities to recognize Open and Distance Learning Mode, did not prohibit the Universities in not recognising the degrees as Academic Council is vested with the power to decide which examination of the Universities can be acceptable and the said decision was taken in terms of the judgment cited ( _supra_ ). Equivalency has to be seen from the quality of the scheme and syllabus. No such any material has been placed on record to establish that the course was same or **WP(C).No.32007 OF 2013(A)** **8** different. In view of what has been stated above, the impugned decisions cannot be said to be faulted with. This writ petition sans merit, accordingly, dismissed. **Sd/-** **AMIT RAWAL JUDGE** nak **WP(C).No.32007 OF 2013(A)** **9** ## **APPENDIX OF WP(C) 32007/2013** **PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:** **EXHIBIT P1 P1 : COPY OF THE POST GRADUATE DEGREE CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO THE 1ST PETITIONER.** **EXHIBIT P2 P2 : COPY OF THE POST GRADUATE DEGREE CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO THE 2ND PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P3 P3 : COPY OF THE RESULT OF THE 1ST PETITIONER IN THE STATE ELIGIBILITY TEST.** **EXHIBIT P4 P4 : COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT AND ADDRESSED TO THE 1ST PETITIONER.** **EXHIBIT P5 P5 : COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT AND ADDRESSED TO THE 2ND PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P6 P6 : COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER BEFORE THE 5TH RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P7 P7 : COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DTD.14.10.2013 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.** **EXHIBIT P8 P8 : COPY OF GO(MS)NO.526 DTD.17.7.1965 ISSUED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER.** - **EXHIBIT P9 P9 : COPY OF THE CIRCULAR DTD.7.5.2005 ISSUED BY THE KERALA POLICE SERVICE COMMISSION.** **RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS** **EXHIBIT R3(A) TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.620/2010-DL DATED 29-12-2012 EXHIBIT R3(B) TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION NO.14/2013(CPP-II)DATED 17-06-2013 EXHIBIT R3(C) TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.4-8/2014-UI(A) DATED 25-2-20**