The Manager cum Secretary, MSM College, Kayamkulam v. State of Kerala and Others

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN** **FRIDAY ,THE 04TH DAY OF JANUARY 2019 / 14TH POUSHA, 1940** ## **WP(C).No. 33789 of 2010** ## **PETITIONER/S:** **THA MANAGER CUM SECRETARY, MSM COLLEGE MSM COLLEGE, KAYAMKULAM.** **BY ADVS. SRI.BABU VARGHESE (SR.) SRI.JOHNY CHERIAN SRI.KAPPILLIL ANILKUMAR SRI. JOHNSON T JOHN** ## **RESPONDENT/S:** **1 THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION, GOVERNMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 695 001. 2 THE DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION VIKAS BHAVAN, PMG JUNCTION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 695 001. 3 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION, KOLLAM. 691 001. 4 THE UNIVERSITY OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, UNIVERSITY BUILDING, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 034. BY ADVS.** **SRI.BECHU KURIAN THOMAS SC UNIVERSITY OF KERALA SRI.GEORGE POONTHOTTAM SRI.M.RAJAGOPALAN NAIR-SC-KERALA UTY. SRI.THOMAS ABRAHAM SC UNIVERSITY OF KERALA SRI. SUNILNATH-GP** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04.01.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** WPC 33789/10 2 ## **JUDGMENT** The petitioner, who is stated to be the Manager of the MSM College, Kayamkulam, an aided college affiliated to the University of Kerala and operating under a Direct Payment agreement with the Government of Kerala, prays that the special fees collected by the college over the years and deposited in the Personal Deposit Account (PD Account) of the Principal of the College be allowed to be used by them for the augmentation of the facilities of the college. 2. The petitioner says that even though he had approached the Government of Kerala through Ext.P4 series requests and proposals, the same have not been considered until now and he consequently prays that the college be allowed to use the accumulated amount for the benefit of its students and its infrastructure. 3. The learned Government Pleader, appearing on behalf of the 3[rd] respondent, submits that in WPC 33789/10 3 the counter affidavit, dated 25.02.2011, the said respondent has already enumerated the purposes for which the accumulated amount in the PD account can be used, as is mandated by the Government Orders dated 13.09.1990 and 22.08.1997. He says that the accumulated funds in the PD account can be, as per the afore Government Orders, used for the following purposes: i. Purchase of water cooler ii. Purchase of TV/VCR/Computer iii. Purchase of 16mm/35mm projector iv. Purchase of furniture for auditorium v. Purchase of public addressing system vi. Purchase of generator vii. Construction of stadium viii. Construction of play ground ix. Construction of auditorium x. Construction of library complex xi. Providing vehicles for the use of students. WPC 33789/10 4 4. I notice that the counter affidavit further says that as per a Government Order number GO(MS)No.1585/08-H.Edn, dated 25.10.2008, the Principals of the various aided colleges have been permitted to operate the PD accounts strictly on the condition that the funds in credit in these accounts are only to be used for the purpose for which it has been collected, as laid down in the guidelines/orders issued by the Director of College Education/Government governing the collection utilization of such funds. 5. As regards the specific request made by the petitioner through Ext.P4 series of representations is concerned, the Government answers it in paragraph 6 of the counter affidavit which is extracted for easy reference as under: 6. The expenditure sought by Kerala Varma College is covered by the WPC 33789/10 5 above Government Order and the request of the Principal of the MSM college is to sanction that amount for the construction of ladies waiting room etc. which are not the constructions items authorised by the Government Order. Auditorium and Library Complex are specifically mentioned therein. Moreover, by GO(MS)No.312/83/Edn. dated 30.12.83 and explanation thereon as per GO(MS)No.309/85 H.Edn. dated 18.12.85 PD funds cannot be utilized for enhancing the net assets of the management. Hence the request in A2/251/2009 cannot be considered. The request in A2/251/2009 of the Principal, MSM College is that the purchase equipments worth Rs.13,55,460/- of which the list of equipments required for Science Departments was allotted to be enclosed. No such list was provided. Moreover, the unspent balance of laboratory fee could be spent only for buying WPC 33789/10 6 |chemicals and other items for day| |---| |to day use of the students.| |Therefore, the application Exhibit| |P4(b) cannot be considered by the| |Deputy Director of Collegiate| |Education.<br>Request<br>in| |A2/Spl.PD/614/09 (Exhibit P4(c)) of| |the Principal, MSM College is to| |use 1,18,279/- from a balance of| |Rs.7,54,326/- from the lab fee| |collected. This would become the| |assets of the management. By| |collecting lab fee, the amount have| |to be spent only for giving| |training and practical experience| |to the students by purchasing the| |chemicals<br>required<br>in<br>the| |Laboratory. Purchase of chemicals| |to that extent could be sanctioned| |subject to furnishing the actual| |details of items to be purchased.| |Regarding glass wares and other| |equipments, the management is to| |independently provide, apart from| |the PD fund.| 6. After saying so, the Government takes a WPC 33789/10 7 position that the unspent balance in the PD account cannot be used for providing facilities for NAAC Accreditation and that it is the responsibility of the Manager to provide such additional facilities for obtaining this accreditation, since the University Grant Commission is providing funds for the same. 7. When I consider the afore averments in the counter affidavit as also the purposes afore enumerated for the utilization of the funds in the PD account, I see that such purposes have not really kept pace with the changing times. I say this because even though the purchase of a TV/VCR or a 16mm/35mm projector etc are permitted uses for the funds, it is obvious that in the modern times such equipments are completely irrelevant. I am, therefore, of the view that the Government should now have a re-look at this and take a decision whether fresh orders will have to be issued as to the manner in which these funds are WPC 33789/10 8 to be utilized, keeping in mind the needs of the present day, specially that of the students, the infrastructure and the staff of the college. 8. In such perspective, I deem it appropriate that the competent Authority of the Government be directed to consider the changes to be made to the purposes for which the accumulated funds can be put to profitable use and take a decision as to if any modification to the afore Government Orders are required, so that the amounts in the PD account can be used also for purposes other than which are now enumerated in them. Resultantly, I permit the petitioner to approach the Principal Secretary of Department of Higher Education, Government of Kerala, with a fresh representation detailing their requests and claims for use of the accumulated funds in the PD account, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment; and WPC 33789/10 9 if such a representation is received by the said Authority within the time granted herein, the same will be considered, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner as expeditiously as is possible but not later than a period of three months thereafter. **SD/-** ## **DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN** **JUDGE** WPC 33789/10 10 ## APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT ENTERED INTO BY THE MANAGER AND THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF OF THE STATEMENT SHOWING THE POSITION OF UNSPENT BALANCE IN THE PD ACCOUNT OF THE PRINCIPAL OF THE COLLEGE. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE GO DATED 13/09/1990. EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE GO DATED 22/08/1997. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE PROPOSAL DATED 26/02/2009. EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE PROPOSAL DATED 26/02/2009. EXHIBIT P4 B TRUE COPY OF THE PROPOSAL DATED 20/02/2009. EXHIBIT P4 C TRUE COPY OF THE PROPOSAL DATED 26/04/2009. EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 06/06/2009 SENT BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF REPLY DATED 29/07/2009 SENT BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE GO DATED 25/10/2008. EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE GO DATED 27/12/1996. EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 10/07/2009 SENT BY THE PETITIONER. WPC 33789/10 11 ## RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT-R3A TRUE COPY OF THE GO(MS)312/83/H.EDN. DATED 30/12/83. // TRUE COPY // PA TO JUDGE RR