UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT Vs. THARANALLUR EDUCATIONAL AND CULTURAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The first respondent in WP(C) No. 32644/2008 assails the judgment of the learned single Judge dated 21-8-2009. The first respondent, the University of Calicut (hereinafter referred to as the University) is the writ petitioner. The first respondent, a society registered under the Travancore Cochin Literary, Scientific and Charitable Societies Registration Act, 1955, (hereinafter referred to as the Society) applied before the second respondent, the National Council for Teacher Education, (hereafter referred to as NCTE) seeking recognition for starting a new B.Ed college at Irinjalakuda. By Ext.P1 dated 9-8-2007, NCTE informed the Society that conditional recognition was granted under para.7(11) of the NCTE Regulations permitting the Society to start the college with an annual intake of 100 students on satisfaction of the terms and conditions. One of the conditions is that the Society shall obtain affiliation from the University. Following Ext.P1, the Society filed Ext.P2 application dated 25-10-2007 before the University. The University deputed an inspection team which visited the campus on 23-4-2008 and filed Ext.P3 report. For five reasons noted therein, the inspection team recommended not to grant affiliation. Simultaneously, the Society had moved NCTE for according permanent recognition responding to which recognition was granted by Ext.P4 order subject to fulfillment of such other requirements as may be prescribed by the University or the third respondent State as applicable. In answer to Ext.P3, the Society made Ext.P5 representation dated 19-9-2008 before the University explaining the deficiencies noted in Ext.P3 and stating that the deficiencies noted were rectified. Thereafter, failing to have a response from the University, the Society moved the writ petition seeking an order to quash Ext.P3 report and to issue a writ of mandamus against the University to grant affiliation as applied in Ext.P2 application. The learned single Judge by the impugned judgment allowed the writ petition and directed the University to grant affiliation to the Society for running the college in accordance with Ext.P4 recognition granted by NCTE. Direction was also issued to the Commissioner of Entrance Examination for allotment of the students to the Society along with other colleges. Now this appeal.

(2.) We heard the learned counsel for the University, the Society, the Standing Counsel for NCTE and the Government Pleader.

(3.) This appeal is a typical example of the shadow fight between NCTE, a National statutory body and a University in the State. NCTE, who granted recognition asserts that the Society had necessary infrastructural facilities to start a B.Ed College. The University denies it. Who is to be believed It is the sole issue involved in this case. Similar disputes have arisen earlier before this Court as well as before the Apex Court. In State of Maharashtra v. Sant Dnyaneswar Shikshan Shastra Mahavindyalaya and Ors., 2006 9 SCC 1, the Apex Court stated that the University is bound to implement the decision of the NCTE, but that does not mean that the University shall not follow statutory provisions. In Jaya Gokul Educational Trust v. Commr. & Secretary to Government Higher Education Department, 2000 2 KerLT 267, the Apex Court has held that the University ought to have considered the grant of final or further affiliation without waiting for any approval from the State Government and should have acted on the basis of the permission granted by AICTE and other relevant factors in the University Act or Statutes which are not inconsistent with the AICTE Act or its Regulations. In Vikram Sarabhai Edl. Trust & B.Ed. College v. University of Calicut, 2008 2 KerLT 1027, in an identical set of facts and law against the same University, a Full Bench of this Court, at para.12 held,