SUBARNAREKHA MAHAVIDYALAYA Vs. UTKAL UNIVERSITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Subarnarekha Mahavidyalaya, its Principal and nine students of the College are the petitioners seeking a direction from this Court to the effect that the opposite parties should permit the students to appear at the B.Sc. Examination as regular students from the College. The necessity for filing this writ petition was on account of the fact that the University to whom the institution wanted to be affiliated passed an order on 3-2-1983 permitting the institution for opening B. Sc Classes during the academic session 1984-85 and thereafter not allowing the students even to appear as private candidates as per a decision of the Syndicate, as a result of which these students who took admission in the B.Sc. Class during the academic session 1982-83 and completed the course and were scheduled to appear at the annual examination held during the month of May 1984 could not appear at the said examination. This writ petition was filed on 19-4-84, a few days prior to the commencement of the annual B. Sc. Examination in May, 1984, and was listed for admission on 27-4-1984. Realising the urgency of the matter and also that no order can be passed without hearing the university, the matter was directed to be listed for service of notice through special messenger and when the matter was called on 30th of April 1984, after service of notice, the University entered appearance through counsel, but the learned counsel wanted some time on that date and on 1-5-1984, this Court issued notice of admission and hearing and the learned counsel for the University agreed that the matter should be taken up on 8-5-1984 so that if possible appropriate directions could be given to the University to allow the students to appear at the examination. The matter was heard on 8-5-1984 and also on 9-5-1984, but it was not possible for the Court to give any interim direction nor the Court could dispose of the matter and, therefore, on 10-5-1984 it was ordered that the matter be listed immediately after the reopening of the Court after long vacation. In the meantime, the annual examination of the Utkal University for B.Sc. was held in May, 1984 and the students-petitioners could not appear for the said examination.

(2.) According to the petitioners' case, the institution has been duly affiliated to the Utkal University to present candidates for B.Sc. Classes since 1981 and students from the said institution have been appearing at the I.Sc. Examination of the Utkal University. Thereafter, the State Government concurred to the opening of Degree Classes in Science in the said institution in Physics, Chemistry, Botany, Zoology and Mathematics and permitted the institution to admit students for the academic sessions 1981-82 and 1982-83 subject to grant of affiliation by the Utkal University, as would appear from Annexure-1 to the writ petition. Subsequently, by Government letter dated 9-11-192 (Annexure-2), the concurrence was extended for the academic years 1982-83 and 1983-84 on fulfilling certain conditions. It is the petitioners' case that all the conditions precedents contained in the Government letter have been fulfilled so far as the particular institution (petitioner No. 1) is concerned. It is the further case of the petitioners that a local enquiry was conducted on 18-12-1982 by two experts of the University and they recommended that the affiliation of the institution should be granted. This recommendation of the Experts is Annexure-3 to the writ petition. Under the Rules and the University Regulation, the Senate of the University grants affiliation on the recommendation of the Syndicate provided prior concurrence of the State Government is obtained. The Director of College Development Council issued a notification dated 3-2-1983 wherein it has been stated:- It is the case of the petitioners that though in the notification it has been clearly stated that the University was pleased to allow for opening of B.Sc. Course for the session 1982-83, but while indicating the number of seats against the petitioner-institution, namely Subarnarekha Mahavidyalaya, it was by mistake indicated "during the session 1984-85" and therefore, the institution was prevented to present its candidates for B.Sc. Examination though students had duly taken admission during the academic session 1982-83 and had completed their two-year course in the institution. Finding no other alternative, the students of the institution wanted permission to appear at least as private candidates, but that prayer was also rejected by the University by letter dated 11-4-1984 (Annexure-5) and hence the present writ petition. Thus the main contention of the petitioners is that though the State Government has duly concurred to the opening of the Degree classes in Subarnarekha Mahavidyalaya for the academic sessions 1981-82 and 1982-83 and though the Inspectors of the University have recommended for affiliation of the institution and though, in fact, the students have been admitted in the B.Sc. class during the academic session 1982-83 and have completed their course of two years, yet the University is illegally preventing them from taking the annual examination which, according to the petitioners, is on account of some typographical error in the notification dated 3-2-1983.

(3.) In the counter-affidavit filed by the University, the stand taken is that since the College has not been admitted to the privileges of the University for imparting instructions or for presenting candidates in B.Sc. examination, the Syndicate passed a resolution not to admit the private candidates. It is further averred that according to the practice, the university grants affiliation to an institution in the B.Sc. Course after lapse of three years in the minimum of the first batch of candidates for I. Sc. examination and since the College (Subarnarekha Mahavidyalaya) presented candidates for the annual examination of 1982, affiliation was rightly granted to the said institution for B. Sc. from the year 1984-85 and thus there is no mistake in Annexure-4 as contended in the writ petition and this, according to the University, is a wholesome principle for achieving better standard in education.