UPADHYA ART FOUNDATION Vs. KARNATAKA STATE OPENUNIVERSITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this writ petition, petitioner is seeking a declaration that the action of the respondent-University in not approving the Master's degree and Ph. D course of the petitioner foundation as arbitrary and illegal and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Petitioner is also seeking a direction to the University to reconsider and approve Master's degree and Ph. D course in the petitioner's Art Foundation. Challenge is also made to the communication dated 11. 08. 2008 produced at Annexure-N by which while sanctioning Bachelor of Fine Arts course in the petitioner institution, the request made for sanctioning Master in Fine Arts and master in Music course is deferred to be considered only after three years when Bachelor in Fine Arts first batch of students pass out from the petitioner Art Foundation.

(2.) THE petitioner had approached this Court on an earlier occasion seeking a direction to the respondent University to consider its request for permission to conduct Master's degree course. This request was made on 13. 06. 2007 vide Annexure-J. Petitioner stated that they had put up construction of the building by spending Rs. 9,00,000/- and possess a library having books worth Rs. 2,00,000/- apart from having all other requisite infrastructure to enable them to impart education for Master's degree course by following the distance education scheme. As the representation submitted by the petitioner institution was not considered, it approached this Court in W. P. No. 18546/07. This Court by order dated 5th June, 2008 issued a direction to the respondent-University to consider Annexure-J representation and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law with regard to the commencement of the Course namely, Master degree.

(3.) BY the impugned order, the request made by the petitioner-institution for sanction of permission to start Master in Fine Arts and Master in Music is deferred. The reasons assigned, as can be seen from Annexure-N decision is that when the subject was placed before the academic council, the council agreed in principle to sanction the Bachelor in Fine Arts and master in Fine Arts programme to the petitioner institution. However, before signing the Memorandum of Understanding, the petitioner institution had advertised and enrolled students not only for Bachelor in fine Arts and Master in Fine Arts but also for Ph. D course and therefore the respondent University took serious note of the same and took a decision to cancel all the programmes given to the said foundation for flouting the university Regulations. However, since the petitioner had approached the high Court, as per the direction issued by the High Court the subject was placed before the Academic council for discussion but since the institution had written certain uncalled for and intemperate letters to tarnish the image of the University in the eyes of the students, parents and public, the University found that it should not associate with such institutions. It also felt that the University must array with another organisation by name, dmsla which was giving programmes in Bachelor in Fine Arts for the last four years and was not yet given Master in Fine Arts. On these grounds, the request made by the petitioner has been rejected for the current year.