High Court of KeralaSingle Judge2019-07-25Disposed of; petitions disposed of with directi...

Mar Augusthinose College v. Mahatma Gandhi University

Case / Petition Number:WP(C).Nos.17511 & 20278 of 2019

Case Details & Bench

Court: High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges: P. V. Asha
Judgment Date: 2019-07-25
Court Decision / Holding: Petitions disposed of; the court holds that there is no statutory provision empowering the University Syndicate to direct elections in a particular manner or date, but the colleges are free to conduct the College Union elections on a date convenient to them. The list of elected candidates must be furnished to the University before 9 September 2019.
Final Disposition: Disposed of; petitions disposed of with directions that colleges may conduct elections on dates convenient to them and must submit list of candidates by 9 September 2019.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

Principal, Mar Augusthinose College
Manager, Mar Augusthinose College

Respondents

Mahatma Gandhi University
Vice Chancellor, Mahatma Gandhi University

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

• Sri Baby Isaac Illickal
• Sri Isaac Kuruvilla Illikal

Counsels for Respondents

• Sri Asok M. Cherian, SC, M.G. University

Case Synopsis & Summary

Two writ petitions filed by the Principal and Manager of Mar Augusthinose College challenge Mahatma Gandhi University's control over College Union elections. The petitions seek to declare that the petitioners are entitled to decide on the conduct of the College Union Election in the college as per Ext.P12 and Ext.P15 judgments, irrespective of the University’s directions, and to mandamus the University to permit councilors elected to the college union to participate in the university’s General Council and other committees. They contend that the University has no authority to issue directions about the programme, including the date and mode of election, and they argue that the University’s Ext.P10 guidelines fixing a date (09.08.2019) should not override the college’s autonomy, particularly in light of incidents of campus unrest. They rely on the Council of Principals’ of Colleges v. State of Kerala (2004 (2) KLT 995) and Ext.P15 (this Court’s 2016 decision) to press their claim of autonomy and restrict university interference. The University counters that Ext.P10 provides a schedule and that Lyngdoh Committee recommendations govern student elections, and that the matter of judicial intervention in this domain had been referred to a constitution bench. In the final ruling, the court finds no statutory provision empowering the Syndicate to direct elections in date or manner; yet directs that the college provide the list of elected candidates by 9 September 2019 and permits the college to proceed with elections on a date convenient to them, disposing of the petitions accordingly.

Provisions of Law Cited

University Act (no provision empowering the Syndicate to direct college union elections)

Legal Doctrines & Maxims

JM Lyngdoh Committee Report on College Elections
Doctrine of institutional autonomy and internal governance

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioners contend that Ext.P12 (Council of Principals v. Kerala) and Ext.P15 (this Court’s 2016 WP(C) judgment) lay down a settled position that the University has no authority to direct how/when College Union elections are conducted. They challenge Ext.P10 guidelines directing a fixed date for elections, seeking to hold elections on a date convenient to the college and to submit the list of elected candidates to the University by 9 September 2019. They seek a writ of mandamus permitting councilors elected to participate in the University General Council and other committees and urge that the college’s autonomy be respected under Ext.P12 and Ext.P15.

Contentions of Respondents

The University argues that Ext.P10 provides a schedule and that the Lyngdoh Committee recommendations govern student elections; it maintains that the matter of judicial legislation in this area was referred to a constitution bench and remains unresolved; the University contends that elections should be regulated to maintain campus order and avoid external disturbances, and that the University’s oversight is appropriate.

Cited Precedents (3)

Case Name	Citation	Treatment	Explanation
Council of Principals' of Colleges v. State of Kerala	2004 (2) KLT 995	Positive	Cited as the basis for autonomy of colleges and for limiting university interference in college elections.
Supreme Court order (2006) 8 SCC 304	(2006) 8 SCC 304	Mentioned Only	Exhibit P13 cited to reference interim directions to follow Lyngdoh recommendations; not central to the ruling.
WP(C).29673/2016	WP(C).29673/2016	Positive	Ext.P15 judgement of this Court is relied upon as part of the settled position that the University lacks authority to direct elections in a particular manner.

Diagnostic Tool

Beta

Does this judgment govern your specific facts?

Don't risk relying on a distinguishable precedent. Enter your facts or proposition below. We will test it against Mar Augusthinose College v. Mahatma Gandhi University and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA** # **THURSDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF JULY 2019 / 3RD SRAVANA, 1941 WP(C).No.17511 of 2019** ## **PETITIONERS:** - **1 PRINCIPAL, MAR AUGUSTHINOSE COLLEGE, RAMAPURAM BAZAR.P.O, KOTTAYAM-686 576 (BY ITS PRESENT PRINCIPAL DR.V.J.JOSEPH)** - **2 MANAGER MAR AUGUSTHINOSE COLLEGE, RAMAPURAM BAZAR.P.O, KOTTAYAM-686576(BY ITS PRESENT MANAGER REV. DR GEORGE VARGHESE NJARAKUNNEL)** **BY ADVS.** **SRI.BABY ISSAC ILLICKAL SRI.ISAAC KURUVILLA ILLIKAL** ## **RESPONDENTS:** - **1 MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, PRIYADARSINI HILLS, KOTTAYAM-686560** - **2 VICE CHANCELLOR MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, PRIYADARSINI HILLS, KOTTAYAM-686560 BY ADV. SRI.ASOK M. CHERIAN, SC, M.G. UNIVERSITY** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25.07.2019, ALONG WITH WP(C).NO.20278/2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** W.P.(C).Nos.17511 & 20278 of 2019 2 ## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** # **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA** **THURSDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF JULY 2019 / 3RD SRAVANA, 1941** ## **WP(C).No.20278 of 2019** ## **PETITIONERS:** **1 PRINCIPAL, MAR AUGUSTHINOSE COLLEGE, RAMAPURAM BAZAR.P.O, KOTTAYAM-686 576 (BY ITS PRESENT PRINCIPAL DR.V.J.JOSEPH) 2 MANAGER MAR AUGUSTHINOSE COLLEGE, RAMAPURAM BAZAR.P.O, KOTTAYAM-686576(BY ITS PRESENT MANAGER REV. DR GEORGE VARGHESE NJARAKUNNEL)** **BY ADV. SRI.BABY ISSAC ILLICKAL** ## **RESPONDENTS:** |**1**|**MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY**| |---|---| ||**REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR,**| ||**PRIYADARSINI HILLS, KOTTAYAM 686 560.**| |**2**|**VICE CHANCELLOR,**| ||**MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS**| ||**REGISTRAR, PRIYADARSINI HILLS, KOTTAYAM 686 560.**| ## **OTHER PRESENT:** **SRI.ASOK.M.CHERIYAN,SC,M.G.UTY** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25.07.2019, ALONG WITH WP(C).17511/2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** W.P.(C).Nos.17511 & 20278 of 2019 3 ## **J U D G M E N T** Principal and Manager of Mar Augusthinose College are the petitioners in both these writ petitions. The issue relates to the election to the College union. Parties and documents referred to in this common judgment are as described in W.P.(C).No.17511 of 2019 unless otherwise specified. 2. W.P.(C).No.17511 of 2019 was filed seeking the following reliefs: - (i) Declare that the petitioners are entitled to decide on matters relating to the conduct of College Union Election in the college as per Ext.P12 & Ext.P15 Judgments irrespective of the directions of the 1[st] respondent; - (ii) Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any appropriate Writ, Order or direction commanding the respondents to permit the Councilors elected to the University Union through the College Union Election conducted by the petitioners, to be represented at the General Council and other Committees of the Mahatma Gandhi University Union; - (iii) Declare that the respondents have no authority to issue directions in respect of the programme of College Union Election in the petitioners' college including the date of election and the mode of election; - (iv) grant such other relief this Hon'ble Court may deem fit & proper, in the facts and circumstances of the case. W.P.(C).Nos.17511 & 20278 of 2019 4 3. During the pendency of the writ petition, the University issued Ext.P10 guidelines with direction to the Principals of all affiliated Colleges to conduct the election to the College unions on 09.08.2019 as per the schedule given therein with liberty to the Colleges to conduct the same either in Presidential Mode or in Parliamentary Mode as envisaged in the recommendations contained in the J.M.Lyngdoh Committee Report. 4. According to the petitioners, if election is conducted in their College simultaneously as in all other Colleges, it will create very serious problems which will affect the peaceful and conducive atmosphere in the College. Producing various reports in respect of the incidents which occurred in the College campus on account of the activities at the instigation of various political parties, students organizations, tresspass by outsiders, dharnas, strikes, boycotts, clashes, destructions etc., creating total unrest and chaos in the campus, W.P.(C).Nos.17511 & 20278 of 2019 **==> picture [7 x 8] intentionally omitted <==** resulting in loss of classes, the petitioners have stated that they wanted to conduct the election on a date which is convenient to them. It is stated that they have banned all political as well as organizational activities inside the campus, in order to ensure discipline and quality education. 5. Relying on the judgment of this Court in **Council of Principals' of Colleges v. State of Kerala** [2004 (2) KLT 995], Ext.P14 judgment of the Apex Court in the appeal filed against it and Ext.P15 judgment of this Court in W.P.(C).No.29673 of 2016, it is their contention that the University does not have any authority to issue any direction to the affiliated Colleges to conduct the election to College union in a particular manner or to conduct it on a particular date and it is upto the College to decide when and how the election to the College unions has to be conducted. It is pointed out that even though, the Apex Court had passed an interim order in the SLP filed against the judgment in **Council of Principals** ' W.P.(C).Nos.17511 & 20278 of 2019 6 case (supra) directing to follow the J.M.Lyngdoh Committee Report/Recommendation and the issue as to the scope of judicial legislation in the matter was thereafter referred to a constitution bench, ultimately that issue was not decided for non prosecution of the matter and it resulted in dismissal in Ext.P15 judgment. 6. At the same time, the learned Standing Counsel points out that the Supreme Court had accepted the position that the elections were being conducted in tune with the J.M.Lyngdoh Committee recommendations and issue was closed taking note of the same. It is also pointed out that interference of outsiders or organizations would be far lesser when election is conducted simultaneously. 7. However this is seriously disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioner, pointing out that once Civil Appeal itself was dismissed the interim order no longer survives. It is also pointed out that in Ext.P15 judgment dated 29.09.2016 in W.P. W.P.(C).Nos.17511 & 20278 of 2019 7 (C).No.29673 of 2016, all these aspects were considered and it was reiterated that the University does not have any authority to issue any orders directing the Colleges to conduct the election to the College union in a particular manner in the absence of any provision in the University Act which empowers the syndicate for that purpose. Therefore, in the light of settled position of law by virtue of the aforesaid judgments, the directions in Ext.P10 cannot be enforced against the petitioners College. It would be within the competence of the petitioners College to decide when the election to the College union has to be conducted and the manner in which it has to be conducted. 8. In this case the petitioners want to conduct the election on a day at their convenience which cannot be on a date fixed by the University. From the judgments relied on by the learned counsel for the petitioners, it is clear that University does not have any right to direct the Colleges to conduct the W.P.(C).Nos.17511 & 20278 of 2019 8 election on a particular date or in a particular manner. However for the purpose of the election to the University union every College would have to furnish the names of the elected representatives of their College union before 09.09.2019. At any rate there cannot be any objection for them to follow the procedure prescribed in Ext.P10, except for the dates specified there. Therefore Petitioners would be free to conduct the election to their College union on a day convenient to them. At any rate, the list of candidates elected to the College union shall be furnished to the University before the date fixed for the same in Ext.P10 i.e., 09.09.2019. These writ petitions are disposed of accordingly. **==> picture [137 x 12] intentionally omitted <==** ## **P.V.ASHA, JUDGE.** AS W.P.(C).Nos.17511 & 20278 of 2019 9 ## **APPENDIX OF WP(C) 17511/2019** ## **PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:** **EXHIBIT P1 PHOTOCOPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED 04.08.2017 IN WP9C)NO.25836/2017** - **EXHIBIT P2 PHOTOGRAPHS FROM THE CCTV CAMERA INSTALLED NEAR THE COLLEGE GATE** - **EXHIBIT P3 PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE INCIDENTS ON 31.07.2017** - **EXHIBIT P4 PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE INCIDENT ON 05.03.2019 OBTAINED FROM THE CCTV CAMERAS OF THE COLLEGE** - **EXHIBIT P5 PHOTOCOPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BEFORE THE POLICE DT.06.03.2019** - **EXHIBIT P6 PHOTOCOPY OF THE RECEIPT FROM THE POLICE ACKNOWLEDGING THE RECEIPT OF THE COMPLAINT ON 06.03.2019** - **EXHIBIT P6 A PHOTOCOPY OF THE RECEIPT FROM THE POLICE ACKNOWLEDGING THE RECEIPT OF THE COMPLAINT ON 08.03.2019** - **EXHIBIT P7 PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE ACTIVITIES OF THE STUDENT ORGANIZATIONS** - **EXHIBIT P8 PHOTOCOPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE COLLEGE CALENDAR 2018-19** - **EXHIBIT P9 PHOTOCOPY OF THE STUDENTS CODE OF CONDUCT RULES 2005(IN COLLEGE HAND BOOK 2018)** - **EXHIBIT P10 PHOTOCOPY OF THE PREVIOUS NOTIFICATIONS FOR COLLEGE UNION ELECTIONS DT.30.07.2018** - **EXHIBIT P10 A PHOTOCOPY OF THE PREVIOUS NOTIFICATION FOR COLLEGE UNION ELECTIONS DT.02.08.2017** W.P.(C).Nos.17511 & 20278 of 2019 10 **EXHIBIT P11 PHOTOCOPY OF THE 'CONSTITUTION FOR COLLEGE UNIONS'** **EXHIBIT P12 PHOTOCOPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN COUNCIL OF PRINCIPALS' OF COLLEGE V. STATE OF KERALA 2004(2) KLT 995 EXHIBIT P13 PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER OF THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT REPORT IN (2006) 8 SCC 304 EXHIBIT P14 PHOTOCOPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT DT.01.02.2016 EXHIBIT P15 PHOTOCOPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WP(C)29673/2016 DT.29.09.2016** W.P.(C).Nos.17511 & 20278 of 2019 11 ## **APPENDIX OF WP(C) 20278/2019** **PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:** **EXHIBIT P1 PHOTOCOPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED 4.8.2017 IN WPC NO. 25836/2017 EXHIBIT P2 PHOTOCOPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS FROM THE CCTV CAMERA INSTALLED NEAR THE COLLEGE GATE.** **EXHIBIT P3 PHOTOCOPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE INCIDENTS ON 31.7.2017** **EXHIBIT P4 PHOTOCOPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE INCIDENT ON 3.5.2019 OBTAINED FROM THE CCTV CAMERAS OF THE COLLEGE.** **EXHIBIT P5 PHOTOCOPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BEFORE THE POLICE DATED 6.3.2019 EXHIBIT P6 PHOTOCOPY OF THE RECEIPT FROM THE POLICE ACKNOWLEDGING THE RECEIPT OF THE COMPLAINT ON 6.3.2019 EXHIBIT P6 A PHOTOCOPY OF THE RECEIPT FROM THE POLICE ACKNOWLEDGING THE RECEIPT OF THE COMPLAINT ON 8.3.2019 EXHIBIT P7 PHOTOCOPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE ACTIVITIES OF THE STUDENT ORGANIZATIONS. EXHIBIT P8 PHOTOCOPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE COLLEGE CALENDAR 2018-19 EXHIBIT P9 PHOTOCOPY OF THE STUDENTS' CODE OF CONDUCT RULES 2005. EXHIBIT P10 PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 9.7.2019 EXHIBIT P10 A PHOTOCOPY OF THE NOTIFICATION OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 9.7.2019 EXHIBIT P11 PHOTOCOPY OF THE 'CONSTITUTION FOR COLLEGE UNIONS'.** W.P.(C).Nos.17511 & 20278 of 2019 12 **EXHIBIT P12** **PHOTOCOPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN COUNCIL OF PRINCIPALS' OF COLLEGES V. STATE OF KERALA 2004 (2) KLT 995.** **EXHIBIT P13** **PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER OF THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT REPORTED IN (2006) 8 SCC 304.** **EXHIBIT P14 PHOTOCOPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT DATED 1.2.2016** **EXHIBIT P15 PHOTOCOPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WPC NO. 29673/2016 DATED 29.9.2016** **EXHIBIT P16 PHOTOCOPY OF THE NEWSPAPER REPORTS IN MALAYALA MANORAMA DATED 14.7.2019** **EXHIBIT P17 PHOTOCOPY OF THE NEWSPAPER REPORT IN MALAYALA MANORAMA DATED 20.7. 2019**