MAHESH S O YESHWANTRAO TICKELY Vs. PRINCIPAL INSTITUTE OF PHARMACY JANATA SHIKSHAN PRASARAK MANDAL PUSAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) It would be convenient to take these two petitions for consideration together as the main point, which is raised in these two petitions, relates to the validity of Clause No. 9 of the Resolution of the Government of Maharashtra, Education and Employment Department, dated 21st May, 1983, which prohibits the transfer of a student from one institute to another.

(2.) The two petitioners in Writ Petition No. 1892 of 1986, after passing the examination in Diploma in Pharmacy from Datta Meghe Polytechnic, Nagpur, which is affiliated to the Board of Technical Education, Maharashtra State, made an application in June, 1984, for admission to respondent No. 1 - Institution and were admitted in August, 1984, to the First Year Course in Bachelor of Pharmacy, the tuition-fees for the course being Rs. 6,000/- per annum. The petitioners having passed IInd Year Examination of Bachelor of Pharmacy in First Division in July 1986, took admission in the Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences affiliated to the Nagpur University. They applied for a transfer certificate to respondent No. 1 on 1st August, 1986, but were told that transfer certificates would not be issued, unless a donation of Rs. 50,000/- was paid by each of them. Respondent No. 1, having raised the contention that the petitioners had executed an agreement in its favour that they would not seek a transfer from the Institutions, and that the Rules framed by the Government Resolution aforesaid prohibited transfer from the Institution to another, the petitioners amended the petition by contending that while they were in examination-hall, their signatures were obtained on the so-called agreements and that they had not read what the contents were and they never executed any agreement to that effect. It is also urged that the agreements, if any, were against the public policy and void. With regard to the rule prohibiting transfer from one institution to another, it was urged that those rules are violative of Article 14 of the constitution. In any even, it was urged that one student Abhay Vishwasrao Bhuthal, who had passed his First Year B. Pharm. Examination from respondent No. 1-Institution, had applied for getting a transfer-certificate for securing admission in another Institute which was getting Government grant, was given a transfer-certificate after he paid donation to respondent No. 1. The petitioners, therefore, prayed for a direction to respondent No. 1 to issue transfer-certificates to them and for a direction to respondent No. 2, the Registrar, Amravati University, to issue migration-certificates. By amendment it was prayed that Clause 9 of the Government Resolution, dated 21st May, 1983, prohibiting the students from obtaining transfer from the institute not getting grant to Institutes getting the grant, be declared as ultra vires and unconstitutional as violative of Article 14 of the Constitution.

(3.) In Writ Petition No. 1910 of 1986, the three petitioners had passed 12th-Standard examination in the year 1984-85, and in the year 1985-86 were admitted to the Nagpur College of Pharmacy, the second respondent therein, which was recognised by the State of Maharashtra. The petitioners had paid fees for the academic year 1985-86, amounting to Rs. 6,500/- and also paid Rs. 1,000/- as deposit to be refunded after the completion of the course, the course being of four-years, for which the B. Pharm Examination is being conducted by the Nagpur University, respondent No. 1 therein. The three respondents were successful in the Part 1, B. Pharma Examination and applied for admission to the Department of Pharmaceutical Science, Nagpur University, (respondent No. 3) and were granted admission by the letter, dated 13th August, 1986, subject to certain conditions, one of the conditions being to obtain a transfer-certificate. Respondent No. 2, however did not issue a transfer-certificate, in spite of the letter by the Registrar of the Nagpur University, asking the principal to comply with the request of granting the transfer-certificates as per rules. In the meanwhile, respondent No. 2 wrote to the petitioners that they would not he admitted to the IInd Year Degree Course as they had not applied for the same. Respondent No. 3, by the letter, dated 16th September, 1986, informed the petitioners that their admission would be discontinued from 23rd September, 1986 if the transfer-certificates were not produced. The grievance of the petitioners is that, as the annual fees in the Department of Pharmacy (respondent No. 3) amount only to Rs. 562/-, respondent No. 2-Institution charges Rs. 6,500/- per annum and so they were asked by respondent No. 2 to pay Rs. 19,500/- as a condition for issuing a transfer certificate in order to avoid loss to the Institution. The petitioners contended that the education cannot be allowed to be made a commerce and the entire action of respondent No. 2 is violative of Articles 14 and 19 of the Constitution, and the rule, if any, prohibiting transfer from one institution to another, would be null and void. They, therefore, sought a direction to respondent Nos. 1 and 4, i.e., Nagpur University and Maharashtra state, to direct respondent No. 2-Institution to issue the transfer-certificates under the pain of withdrawing recognition and cancelling affiliation with the University, an also a direction to respondent No. 3 the Department of Pharmaceutical Science, Nagpur University, not to cancel the admission of the petitioner in B. Pharm. Part II Course by acting on the letter Annexure-G to the petition.