St. Joseph's Institute of Hotel Management & Catering Technology, Palai v. Mahatma Gandhi University

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT:** **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE** **TUESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF AUGUST 2016/25TH SRAVANA, 1938** **WP(C).No. 22499 of 2016 (J)** **----------------------------** **PETITIONER:** ## **----------** **ST. JOSEPH'S INSTITUTE OF HOTEL MANAGEMENT & CATERING TECHNOLOGY, PALAI, CHOONDACHERRY P.O. KOTTAYAM DISTRICT-686 579, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR.** **BY ADVS.SRI.BABY ISSAC ILLICKAL SRI.ISAAC KURUVILLA ILLIKAL** **RESPONDENT(S):** **--------------** **1. MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, PRIYADARSINI HILLS P.O. KOTTAYAM-686 560.** **2. VICE CHANCELLOR** **MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, PRIYADARSINI HILLS P.O. KOTTAYAM-686 560.** **BY ADV. SRI.ASOK M. CHERIAN,SC** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16-08-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** **K.V.** ## **WP(C).No. 22499 of 2016 (J)** ## **----------------------------** **APPENDIX** **PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ----------------------P1 COPY OF THE AFFILIATION ORDER DATED 19.11.2010. P2 COPY OF THE ORDER OF THIS HON'BLE COURT DATED 29.10.2010. P2(A) COPY OF THE ORDER OF THIS HON'BLE COURT DATED 9.11.2010. P3 COPY OF THE LETTER OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT NO 11. P4 COPY OF THE SAID LETTER DATED 04.06.2014. P5 COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER DATED 11.02.2015. P6 COPY OF THE APPROVAL ORDER OF THE AICTE DATED 7.4.2015. P7 COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 29.5.2015. P8 COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 6.07.2015. P9 COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE GOVERNMENT. P10 COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 16.12.2015 TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P11 COPY OF THE COVERING LETTER DATED 8.01.2016. P12 COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE AICTE DATED 5.04.2016. P13 COPY OF THE LETTER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 27.04.2016. P14 COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 9.05.2016 (RELEVANT PAGES). P15 COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 6.06.2016. P16 COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF THE PROSPECTUS FOR UG CAP 2016. P17 COPY OF THE RELEVANT DETAILS OBTAINED VIA WEBSITE OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT. P18 COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 28.06.2016. P19 COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 16.06.2016.** **RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS** **----------------------ANNEXURE1: COPY OF G.O.(MS) NO 621/15/H.EN DATED 19.10.2015. /TRUE COPY/** **P.S.TO JUDGE** **K.V** ## **A.M. SHAFFIQUE, J.** ## **-------------------------------------** W.P.(C) No.22499 of 2016 -------------------------------------Dated this the 16[th] day of August, 2016 ## **JUDGMENT** Petitioner is a College conducting a course in Bachelor of Hotel management (BHM). The College had approval for starting the above from All India Council for Technical Education (herein after referred to as “AICTE” for short) with an intake of 60 students. During the academic year 2015-16, the petitioner was permitted to have an intake of 90 seats. During the current academic year 2016-17, the petitioner was permitted to increase the intake to 120 students. Though an application was submitted to the University for necessary sanction, the same was not granted whereas the University had limited the intake to 60 students on the ground that the Government had not given the necessary 'No Objection Certificate' (NOC). 2. The main contention urged by the petitioner is that W.P.(C) No.22499 of 2016 -2- NOC from the Government is not required for the University to grant sanction and that too, with reference to enhancement of the capacity. 3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner relied upon the judgment of this Court in **St. Joseph's Hospital Trust and Another v. Kerala University of Health Sciences and others [2012 KHC 634]** and also the judgment of the Apex Court in **Mahatma Gandhi University and Another v. Manager, St. Alberts College and Others [2012 (4) KHC 485]** to contend that once AICTE's approval is granted, the University is bound to give affiliation and further, NOC from the Government is not a mandatory procedure. 4. A statement is filed on behalf of the respondent University _inter alia_ stating that the University cannot approve the increase in intake immediately when the application is submitted. The University has to conduct necessary inspections before sanctioning the additional intake. The petitioner submitted application for increasing the intake to 120 for the academic year 2016-17. The inspection W.P.(C) No.22499 of 2016 -3- commission was constituted as per University Order dated 9.5.2016 and a Committee has submitted its report on 21.05.2016, which is pending consideration by the Syndicate. It is further stated that during the previous year, Government granted extension to the approval with an intake of 90 seats as per Government Order dated 19.10.2015. But the said approval was only for the academic year 2015-16, which cannot be extended to the present academic year. 5. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent University. 6. There is no dispute about the fact that though AICTE had granted approval, necessary affiliation has to be obtained from the University, for which, the University may have to conduct inspection as provided under the relevant statutes. This is an instance where the petitioner had sought for additional seats in a course. Though it is argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner that for additional seats, no affiliation is required, I do not think that such a view can be W.P.(C) No.22499 of 2016 -4- sustained. Having regard to the provisions under the Mahatma Gandhi University Act and the Statutes framed thereunder, especially, Chapter 23, for every course as well as additional seats in a course, necessary affiliation has to be obtained from the University, which has to be sanctioned by the Syndicate and hence it cannot be disputed that the sanction of the Syndicate is required for getting affiliation for the additional seats as well. In the case on hand, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the University submits that AICTE's approval was obtained only on 5.4.2016, as evident from Ext.P12 and thereafter, application is submitted to the University on 27.04.2016. The University requires time to process the application and therefore, it may not be possible for the University to grant affiliation immediately thereafter. The last date of allotment would be by the end of September, 2016. 7. On the other hand, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that an application was submitted earlier ie, Ext.P11 dated 8.1.2016, requesting for sanction of W.P.(C) No.22499 of 2016 -5- 30 additional seats for the academic year 2016-17. 8. Be that as it may, insofar as the petitioner had been granted additional seats upto 90 during the previous academic year, there is no reason to deny the affiliation/sanction for the said number of seats. However, as far as the 120 seats are concerned, the University may take appropriate decision in the matter within a specified time frame. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of as under: (i) Petitioner shall be permitted to admit 90 students and necessary sanction shall be granted by the University forthwith to enhance the intake for the academic year 2016-17. (ii) In respect of Ext.P12 application, the University shall take a decision within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. **Sd/A.M. SHAFFIQUE JUDGE** Scl/16.08.2016