Veena P. v. State of Kerala and others

# **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** ## **`PRESENT`** ## **`THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN`** ``` THURSDAY, THE 5[TH] DAY OF OCTOBER 2023 / 13TH ASWINA, 1945 ``` ## **`WP(C) NO. 4811 OF 2021`** ## **`PETITIONER:`** ``` VEENA P. AGED 35 YEARS W/O. DEEPU.S., LECTURER IN COMPUTER ENGINEERING, N.S.S.POLYTECHNIC COLLEGE, PANDALAM-689 501, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, RESIDING AT KRISHNAKRIPA, POOVATTOOR WEST, MAVADY P.O., -691 507, KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM DISTRICT ``` ``` BY ADVS. P.M.JOSEPH SRI.R.S.HARI KUMAR ``` ## **`RESPONDENTS:`** - **`1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,PIN-695 001`** - **`2 DIRECTOR OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION, DIRECTORATE OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION, PADMAVILASAM ROAD, EAST FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,PIN-695 023`** - **`3 N.S.S. POLYTECHNIC COLLEGE, PANDALAM, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, N.S.S. GOVERNING BODY, PERUNNA P.O., CHANGANASSERY, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT-686 102`** - **`4 THE PRINCIPAL, N.S.S.POLYTECHNIC COLLEGE, PANDALAM-689 501, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT`** - **`5 ALL INDIA COUNCIL FOR TECHNICAL EDUCATION, REPRESENTED BY ITS MEMBER SECRETARY, NELSON MANDELA MARG, VASANT KUNJ, NEW DELHI-110 070`** - **`6 MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, KOTTAYAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, PRIYADARSHINI HILLS, KOTTAYAM-686 560`** - **`7 PARVATHY G.S., LECTURER IN COMPUTER ENGINEER, N.S.S. POLYTECHNIC COLLEGE, PANDALAM-689 501, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT`** - **`8 ARYA J. NAIR, LECTURER IN COMPUTER ENGINEER, N.S.S. POLYTECHNIC COLLEGE, PANDALAM-689 501, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT`** ``` WP(C) NO.4811 OF 2021 ``` ``` 2 ``` ``` 9SANDHYA S., LECTURER IN COMPUTER ENGINEER, N.S.S. POLYTECHNIC COLLEGE, PANDALAM-689 501, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT SRI.P.GOPAL SRI.SAJITH KUMAR V., SC, AICTE SRI.ASOK M. CHERIAN, SC, M.G. UNIVERSITY SRI.P.NANDAKUMAR SMT.AMRUTHA SANJEEV SRI.SUNIL KUMAR KURIAKOSE-GP ``` ``` THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON ``` ``` 05.10.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` ``` WP(C) NO.4811 OF 2021 ``` ``` 3 ``` ## **ANU SIVARAMAN, J.** ## **= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C).No.4811 of 2021** **= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 5[th] day of October, 2023** ## **JUDGMENT** 1. This writ petition is filed challenging Exhibit P16 order of the 3[rd] respondent promoting the 7[th] respondent as Head of Department in Computer Engineering at the NSS Polytechnic College, Pandalam. Challenge is also raised against Exhibit P11 Government Order dated 12.2.2019 as well as Exhibit P3 and P4 Government Orders as also seeking directions to respondents 1 to 3 to promote the petitioner as Head of the Department. 2.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader, the learned counsel appearing for respondents 3 and 4, the learned standing counsel appearing for the 5[th] respondent AICTE, the learned standing counsel appearing for the 6[th] respondent University as well as the learned counsel appearing for respondents 7 to 9. 3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the ``` WP(C) NO.4811 OF 2021 ``` ``` 4 ``` petitioner, who was appointed as Lecturer in Computer Engineering under the 3[rd] respondent since 04.06.2007 and has the qualification of B.Tech with First Class with Honours in Computer Science and Engineering as well as Master of Engineering Degree in Computer Science and Engineering with First Class from Anna University, Chennai obtained after undergoing a regular course of study by availing leave without allowance. It is submitted that by Exhibit P2 Government Order dated 20.02.2014, the AICTE scheme was made applicable to Government and aided polytechnic colleges in Kerala. The qualification prescribed for appointment of Head of Department as per Annexure II to Exhibit P2 was Bachelor’s and Master’s Degree in the concerned branch. It is submitted that by Exhibit P3 Government Order dated 29.12.2014 and Exhibit P4 dated 20.12.2014, the 1[st] respondent had accorded sanction to the Musaliar Educational Trust as well as the KMP College of Engineering to admit teachers of Government Polytechnic Colleges in the existing M.Tech Courses in the two colleges without detriment to their normal duties by rearrangement in timings of the existing courses and subject to approval of the AICTE and the University. It is submitted that the two self financing engineering colleges admitted teachers of Government and aided polytechnic colleges, including respondents 7 to 9 and conducted classes by ``` WP(C) NO.4811 OF 2021 ``` ``` 5 ``` rearrangement in class timings without approval from the AICTE and Mahatma Gandhi University. It is stated that no approval was obtained for the conduct of the M.Tech courses by rearranging class timings as directed in Exhibits P3 and P4. Exhibits P5 and P6 RTI replies are relied on in support of the said contention. It is stated that the Apex Court has held that prior approval from the AICTE is compulsory and mandatory for conduct of a technical course and the Chairman of the AICTE had, by Exhibit P8, communicated copy of Exhibit P7 order of the Apex Court to Vice Chancellors of all Universities and the AICTE has published approval process for the academic year 2014-2015 on the basis of the said directions. It is contended that since respondents 7 to 9 had acquired their M.Tech qualifications from the said two self financing colleges without approval having been granted for the rearrangement of the class timings for the courses, their qualifications are not liable to be taken into account. Exhibit P16 order of promotion is, therefore, challenged on the ground that since there is no approval for the parttime courses conducted by the two self financing colleges, the qualification acquired by the contesting party respondents are liable to be ignored and the petitioner is entitled to be promoted. Exhibit P11 order of the Government considering the report of the committee constituted by the Government and treating the M.Tech ``` WP(C) NO.4811 OF 2021 ``` ``` 6 ``` qualifications acquired from the KMP college, Indira Gandhi Memorial Trust, Kothamangalam and Musaliar College awarded by the Mahatma Gandhi University as valid is also under challenge. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner relies on the judgment dated 29.8.2019 of the Apex Court in **Vinit Garg and others v. University Grants Commission and others** (W.P.(C).No.1510 of 2018) to contend that the qualifications prescribed by the UGC are mandatory and that prior approval of the AICTE is required for the conduct of any technical course. It is contended that the RTI replies received by the petitioner would show that no prior approval was available for the conduct of the courses by the two self financing colleges and that as such the treating of the qualification acquired by the contesting party respondents from the said colleges as valid was unsustainable. 5. The 1[st] respondent has filed a counter affidavit stating that the 1[st] respondent, as per Ext.P3 G.O.(Rt) No.3047/2014/H.Edn dated 29.12.2014, accorded sanction to the Chairman, Musaliar Education Trust to admit teachers of Government Polytechnic Colleges in the existing M.Tech course in Musaliar College of Engineering and Technology, Pathanamthitta without detrimental to their normal ``` WP(C) NO.4811 OF 2021 ``` ``` 7 ``` duties by the rearrangement in timing of the existing courses subject to the condition that there will not be any financial commitment on the part of the AICTE and the University. Thereafter, the recommendations of the committee formed was considered and Exhibit P11 order was issued implementing the findings of the committee constituted for hearing and disposing the grievances of faculty members from Polytechnic colleges, who had secured their M.Tech degree through week-end mode of study and it was decided to validate their qualifications as a special case. It is further contended that in Ext.P2 order, it is specifically stated that the date of effect of placement in the AICTE scheme will be on 01.07.2013 and all existing teachers, fully qualified as per the AICTE norms will be placed into AICTE scheme on 01.07.2013. It is stated that while implementing the AICTE scheme in the Government and Aided Polytechnic College as per Ext.P2, there are certain conditions specified in Ext.P2 and that the qualification required for the Head of the Department Engineering /Technology is specified in the Annexure 2 to Ext.P2. It is also submitted that while giving sanction as per Ext.P3 and P4, it is specifically stated that such sanction is subject to the approval of the AICTE and University concerned. Therefore, the contention of the petitioner that the State Government has no power or authority to accord sanction to the ``` WP(C) NO.4811 OF 2021 ``` ``` 8 ``` institution to admit the students in vacant seats of M.Tech program/courses and to conduct classes by rearrangement in class timings and to approve/validate an educational qualification which is not approved by the AICTE is absolutely incorrect and without any basis. 6. The 3[rd] respondent, who is the appointing authority, has filed a counter affidavit producing Exhibit R3(a) Rules relating to the Kerala Technical Education (Private Engineering Colleges/Polytechnics) Service Rules and contending that the qualification prescribed for promotion is a Bachelor's Degree with not less than 60% marks and five years experience as Lecturer. By Exhibit P2 order dated 20.02.2014, the Government implemented the AICTE Scheme and Master's degree is required for getting the benefits of the Scheme. It is contended that the NSS Polytechnic has morning session from 9.15 am to 1.00 pm and the afternoon session from 1.45 pm to 4.30 pm and respondents 7 to 9 joined the two year course in M.Tech in Computer Science at the Musaliar College of Engineering and Technology, Pathanamthitta (weekend course) commencing from academic year 2014-15 to 2015-16 without obtaining sanction from the Management. It is submitted that they have attended the duties assigned to them without giving room for any complaint. They ``` WP(C) NO.4811 OF 2021 ``` ``` 9 ``` submitted representation to the Management for issuance of No Objection Certificate for entering their M.Tech PG degree in their service book, which was issued as per Exhibit R3(b) dated 27.02.2019. They also approached this Court filing W.P.(C).No.22228 of 2020 seeking directions to endorse their qualifications. The writ petition was allowed by Exhibit R3(c) judgment dated 23.11.2020. The 2[nd] respondent thereafter endorsed the M.Tech qualifications of respondents 7 to 9 in their service book and the management promoted the 7[th] respondent, who is senior to the petitioner, as HOD and later as Principal of the college. It is contended that, by Exhibit P11 order, after considering the recommendation of the committee, the report of the P&ARD and the report of the 2[nd] respondent, the Government ordered that those who secured M.Tech (week-end) Degree from Musaliar College awarded by the Mahatma Gandhi University shall be treated as valid as a one time exemption as a special case to safeguard the quality of technical education in the Diploma stream. - 7.The contesting party respondents have also placed counter affidavits on record stating that the qualifications acquired by them have been validated by the Government and that the petitioner cannot challenge their qualifications in the light of the Government Orders. ``` WP(C) NO.4811 OF 2021 ``` ``` 10 ``` 8. The 5[th] respondent has also placed a counter affidavit on record stating that, as per the policy laid down by the AICTE, there are two types of programs, Regular programs and Open and Distance Learning/Online (ODL) programs. It is submitted that in regular programs, classes may be held in face to face mode and in the normal day timings, such as first shift, second shift, evening shift, part-time, weekend etc. If the classes are held and the students physically attend the classes, it is a Regular program. In ODL/Online programs, the students attend the classes through receipt of study materials in PDF files/books/notes/video lectures etc. and prior announced interactive sessions are held once in a while to address the difficulties faced by the students. The AICTE has issued Exhibit R5(a) public notice clarifying the types of programs based on the mode of conduct of classes by order dated 13.08.2020. ## 9.It is further contended in paragraph 6 as follows:- “It is humbly submitted that AICTE had given approval for conducting M.Tech Course as a Regular Course in the above two colleges. As per AICTE norms, part-time courses are meant only for working professionals having minimum of 2 years' full time work experience. However, no specific approval was granted by AICTE for conducting M.Tech as a part time Course in the above colleges. ``` WP(C) NO.4811 OF 2021 ``` ``` 11 ``` 10.Reply affidavits have been placed on record by the petitioner producing RTI replies and contending that in the absence of prior approval by the AICTE and the University, the qualification acquired by the contesting party respondents would be invalid and void. 11.Having considered the contentions advanced on all sides at considerable length, I notice that the AICTE as well as the University do not support the contention of the petitioner that the M.Tech Degree acquired by the contesting party respondents is invalid for want of prior approval. As a matter of fact, the stand of the AICTE, as extracted above, makes it clear that the AICTE is of the definite opinion that the M.Tech Degree undergone by the contesting party respondents was after regular course of study and the question was only with regard to re-organization of the class timings. In Ext.P11 Government Order, the issue with regard to validity of the qualification acquired by persons like the contesting party respondents is specifically considered and it was found that their qualifications are liable to be treated as valid. In the absence of any contentions raised either by the Government, the University or the AICTE that the qualifications of the contesting party respondents were not acquired after undergoing a regular course of study, I am of the opinion that the prayers as sought for by the petitioner cannot be ``` WP(C) NO.4811 OF 2021 ``` ``` 12 ``` granted. The petitioner has not succeeded in substantiating any of her contentions or raising any sustainable grounds in support of her challenge against the decisions of the Government. In the above view of the matter, I am of the opinion that the prayers as sought for in the writ petition cannot be granted. The writ petition thus fails and the same is, accordingly, dismissed. ``` Sd/- ``` ``` ANU SIVARAMAN JUDGE ``` ``` SJ/NP ``` ``` WP(C) NO.4811 OF 2021 ``` ``` 13 ``` ## **`APPENDIX OF WP(C) 4811/2021`** ``` PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1TRUE COPY OF THE PROVISIONAL CERTIFICATE OF M.E.DEGREE OF THE PETITIONER ISSUED BY ANNA UNIVERSITY , CHENNAI EXHIBIT P2TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF G.O(MS) NO.75/2014/FIN DATED 20.02.2014 ALONG WITH RELEVANT PAGE OF ITS ANNXURE-II, ISSUED BY THE STATE EXHIBIT P3TRUE COPY OF G.O(RT) NO.3047/2014/H.EDN.DATED 29.12.2014 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P4TRUE COPY OF G.O(RT) NO.2750/2014/H.EDN.DATED 20.11.2014 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P5TRUE COPY OF RTI INFORMATION DATED 14.05.2015 ISSUED BY THE PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER UNDER THE 6TH RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P6TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO.994/RTI (APPEAL)/AB/557/714 DATED 19.08.2015 OF THE APPELLATE AUTHORITY AND DIRECTOR (AB) OF AICTE EXHIBIT P7TRUE COPY OF ORDERS DATED 17.04.2014 AND 09.05.2014 IN SLP(C) NO.7277/2014 OF THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT EXHIBIT P7ATRUE COPY OF ORDERS DATED 09.05.2014 IN SLP(C) NO.7277/2014 OF THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT EXHIBIT P8TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO.F1-19/CM/AICTE/2012 DATED 12.05.2014 OF DR.S.S.MANTHA, THE THEN CHAIRMAN OF AICTE EXHIBIT P9TRUE COPY OF THE PUBLIC NOTICE FOR APPROVAL PROCESS 2014-2015 PUBLISHED BY THE AICTE DATED NIL EXHIBIT P10TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF DRAT REPORT FORWARDED TOT HE 1ST AND 2ND RESPONDENT BY LETTER NO.SGS II(HQ) III/SOF/2017-18/314, DATED 03.11.2017 EXHIBIT P11TRUE COPY OF G.O(MS) NO.29/2019/H.EDN DATED 12.02.2019 EXHIBIT P12TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 07.07.2015 ISSUED BY REGIONAL OFFICER, SOUTHERN REGIONAL OFFICE OF AICTE CHENNAI ``` ``` WP(C) NO.4811 OF 2021 ``` ``` 14 ``` |**`EXHIBIT P13`**|**`TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO.7327/ACD/3/2019/REG`**| |---|---| ||**`SECT DATED 04.05.2019 ISSUED BY MAHATMA`**| ||**`GANDHI UNIVERSITY`**| |**`EXHIBIT P14`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS`**| ||**`NO.AICTE-EC/10940/19/DTE DATED 27.04.2019 OF`**| ||**`2ND RESPONDENT`**| |**`EXHIBIT P15`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE`**| ||**`APPROVAL PROCESS HANDBOOK 2019-20 OF AICTE`**| |**`EXHIBIT P16`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE PROMOTION ORDER`**| ||**`NO.G/515/2021 DATED 25.01.2021 OF THE 7TH`**| ||**`RESPONDENT`**| |**`EXHIBIT P17`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED`**| ||**`30.01.2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER`**| ||**`BEFORE RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3 ALONG WITH POSTAL`**| ||**`RECEIPTS`**| |**`EXHIBIT P18`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE G.O.(RT) NO.665/2015/`**| ||**`H.EDN. DATED 30.3.2015 ISSUED BY THE 1ST`**| ||**`RESPONDENT.`**| |**`EXHIBIT P19`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF APPROVAL`**| ||**`PROCESS HANDBOOK 2015-2016`**| |**`EXHIBIT P20`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE PUBLIC NOTICE FOR APPROVAL`**| ||**`PROCESS 2014-2015 ISSUED BY AICTE VIDE ADVT`**| ||**`NO. AB/01(01)/2014`**| |**`EXHIBIT P21`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF APPROVAL`**| ||**`PROCESS HANDBOOK 2013-2014`**| |**`EXHIBIT-P22`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE RTI APPLICATION FILED BY`**| ||**`ONE SRI. RAJASEKHARAN V.M. TO THE PIO, M.G.`**| ||**`UNIVERSITY DATED 16.04.2015.`**| |**`EXHIBIT-P23`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED`**| ||**`08.06.2015 ALONG WITH 1ST APPEAL UNDER RTI`**| ||**`ACT DATED 01.08.2015 FILED BY ONE SRI.`**| ||**`RAJASEKHARAN V.M. TO THE PIO, AICTE AND`**| ||**`APPELLATE AUTHORITY, AICTE.`**| |**`EXHIBIT-P24`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE RTI APPLICATION FILED BY`**| ||**`ONE SRI. RAJASEKHARAN V.M. TO THE PIO, AICTE`**| ||**`DATED 08.06.2015.`**| |**`EXHIBIT-P25`**|**`TRUE COPY OF THE RTI APPLICATION FILED BY`**| ||**`ONE SRI. RAJASEKHARAN V.M. TO THE PIO, M.G.`**| ||**`UNIVERSITY DATED 26.02.2019.`**| ``` RESPONDENTS’ EXHIBITS EXHIBIT R3(a)TRUE COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER DATED 06.06.1975 EXHIBIT R3(b)TRUE COPY OF THE NO-OBJECTION CERTIFICATE DATED 27.02.2019 ISSUED BY THE MANAGEMENT ``` ``` WP(C) NO.4811 OF 2021 ``` ``` 15 ``` ``` EXHIBIT R3(c)TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 23.11.2020 IN WP(C) NO.22228 OF 2020 OF THIS HON’BLE COURT EXHIBIT R3(d)TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 13.03.2020 IN WP(C) NO.17563 OF 2019 OF THIS HON’BLE COURT EXHIBIT R3(e)TRUE COPY OF THE M.TECH DEGREE CERTIFICATE OF THE RESPONDENT NO.7 ISSUED BY THE MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY IN SEPTEMBER 2016 ``` ``` ANNEXURE R5(A)A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER F. NO. AICTE/AB/ACADEMIC/2020-21 DATED 13.08.2020 ISSUED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT ``` - **`EXHIBIT R7 (a) TRUE COPY OF GO(RT) NO.1436/2014/HEDN DATED 01/07/2014 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.`** - **`EXHIBIT R7 (b) TRUE COPY OF GO(RT) NO.3047/2014/HEDN DATED 29/12/2014 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT`** - **`EXHIBIT R7 (c) TRUE COPY OF GO(RT) NO.665/2015/ ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.`** ``` EXHIBIT R7 (d)TRUE COPY OF UO NO.2231/2/2017/ACA VII DATED 22/4/2017 ISSUED BY THE 6TH RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT R7 (e)TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 16/3/2018 ISSUED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT EXHIBIT R7 (f)TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 16/2/2022 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. ```