Allahabad High Court
C/M Dr. M.C. Saxena College Of ... vs State Of U.P. Thru Prin. Secy. ... on 2 July, 2013
Bench: Rajiv Sharma
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
Court No.24
Writ Petition No.4125 (MS) of 2013
Committee of Management Dr.M.C.Saxena
College of Education and another ... Petitioners
Versus
State of U.P. and others ... Opposite parties
-----------
Hon'ble Rajiv Sharma, J.
Heard Dr.L.P.Shukla, learned Counsel for the petitioners, Mr.Sanjay Sarin, learned Standing Counsel and Mr.S.P. Shukla, learned Counsel appearing for Lucknow University.
With the consent of parties, the writ petition is being disposed of at the admission stage itself.
Through the instant writ petition, the petitioners assail the letter dated 1.5.2013 issued by the opposite party no.2/4, so far as it restrains the petitioners from participating in the ongoing process of counselling for admission in B.Ed. Course 2013-14.
In brief, the case of the petitioners is that in the year 1986, a Society for Advancement of Environment Science was registered. The said Society runs an Educational Institution in the name and style of 'Dr. M. C. Saxena College of Education, Lucknow'. The said institution was established in the year 2009 for imparting education of B.Ed. Course. The Institution is recognized by the National Council for Teaching Education (NCTE) and the recognition was granted to the petitioners' institution vide order dated 31.8.2009. When the institution applied for affiliation to the Lucknow University, after completion of all formalities, the University vide order dated 23.7.2010 not only granted temporary affiliation for running B.Ed. course in the year 2010-11 but also approved the appointment of Faculty Members of the petitioners' Institution. Of late, a notice was issued by the competent authority that the Institution may be debarred from taking admission from the next session 2011-12, as the Committee of Management of the Institution is not approved by the University, to which the petitioners tendered their reply. Thereafter, the Registrar of the University/opposite party No.2 vide letter dated 13.7.2011 granted permission to the petitioners' institution for the Academic Session 2011-12.
Thereafter, for the Academic Session 2013-14, a notice dated 9.1.2013 was issued to the petitioners' institution raising objections that since the petitioners have not provided proposal for inspection of the institution, such proposal be furnished within 15 days to the University, otherwise the affiliation for the current session shall be interrupted, to which the petitioners tendered two replies on 23.1.2013 and 13.2.2013. Subsequently, when the competent authority issued a notice raising shortcomings on 8.2.2013, the petitioners too replied to the said notice on 23.3.2013.
In the meantime, on 22.4.2013, petitioners were informed that their request for nomination of Subject Specialist was rejected on the ground that the Committee of Management is not approved by the University. When another notice dated 1.5.2013, impugned in the instant writ petition, was issued, the petitioner no.2 gave reply indicating therein that alleged shortcomings have already been removed and there is no impediment for grant of permanent affiliation. The petitioner No.2 also met the Vice-Chancellor/ opposite party no.3 and apprised him all the facts and requested to intervene in the matter. Thereafter, the Committee of Management was approved vide order dated 16.5.2013, w.e.f. 17.11.2009 for five years. Thereafter, the opposite party No.5 has also been nominated by the Vice-Chancellor/opposite party No.3 vide order dated 31.5.2013 as Subject Specialist.
As the counselling for the present Academic Session is being conducted by the Gorakhpur University and the name of petitioners' institution has not been included, they have preferred the instant writ petition stating therein that the Institution is an 'Associated College' of the University of Lucknow as per provisions of Section 38 of the State Universities Act and as such, even after amendment, which has been made for granting temporary affiliation under Section 37(2) of the Act, no corresponding amendment has been made in Section 38 and as such, the affiliation which has been granted is of permanent nature.
Counsel for the petitioners has further relied on the provisions of clause 13.10 of the Statutes of the University of Lucknow, which reads as under:-
"13.10 Where the recognition to a college is granted subject to certain conditions, the college shall not admit or register students unless the Vice-Chancellor, after due inspection, has issued a certificate that the conditions imposed by the University have been duly fulfilled. If there are practical difficulties for the Vice-Chancellor to inspect the college personally, he may nominate a qualified person or persons to inspect the college concerned."
Counsel for the petitioners, on the basis of aforesaid statutory provisions, submits that there was only one impediment, which has been indicated to the petitioners that the Committee of Management is not approved, which also cannot be taken into consideration as the opposite party no.2 vide letter dated 13.7.2011 granted permission for admission to the petitioners' Institution in B.Ed course for the academic session 2011-12. The Institution was granted affiliation for taking admission in B.Ed. Course for the educational session 2012-13 by the opposite party no.2 vide order dated 26.6.2012. It has also been pointed out that while granting temporary affiliation for educational session 2012-13, no objection of any kind was raised. Apart from above, the Vice-Chancellor approved the Committee of Management with retrospective effect, with effect from 17.11.2009, for a period of five years.
Mr.S.P. Shukla, learned counsel for the University submits that the order passed by the competent authority dated 22.4.2013 is valid, as the Committee of Management was not approved by the Vice-Chancellor. Moroever, the shortcomings as informed to the Institution by the authorities of the University were not completed and the justification given by the Institution has not been found to be satisfactory. Therefore, it is incorrect to say that the University has acted arbitrarily and has denied the legitimate claim of the Institution.
There is no dispute in the fact that vide order dated 31st August, 2006 the Northern Regional Committee of the National Council for Teaching Education after being satisfied that the institution/ society fulfills the requirements under the provisions of NCTE Act, rules and relevant regulations including the norms and standards for the secondary teacher education programme such as instructional facilities, infrastructural facilities, library, accommodation, financial resources, laboratory etc. for running the programme, granted recognition/permission to the Institution for conducting B.Ed course of secondary (Level) of one year duration with an annual intake of 100 students from the academic sessions 2009-2010 subject to the conditions enumerated therein.
As far as association of an Institution with the University is concerned, a Division Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No. 3039(MB) of 2010 observed as under:-
"Section 38 of the State Universities Act does not prescribe any time bound association unlike the amended section of 37(2) wherein sub-clause 10 has been introduced for grant of temporary affiliation and in view of the division bench judgment of this court passed in Writ Petition No. 5881(MB) of 2002 (Committee of Management vs. Chancellor) either the permanent affiliation was to be granted or the application should have been rejected but no temporary affiliation could have been granted. The division bench at that time was considering the unamended statute which is analogous to provisions of Section 38 of the Act. However, after amendment a specific provision has been made for granting temporary affiliation under Section 37(2) whereas no such corresponding amendment has been made in Section 38 of the Act."
It may be noted that a comparative reading of Section- 37 (which deals with the Affiliated Colleges) and Section 38 (which deals with the Associated Colleges) as it stood on or prior to 18.11.2002, both the Sections were identical and did not provide any time bound affiliation under Section 37 of the State Universities Act or any time bound association under Section 38 of the Act. Later on, Section 37 of the Act was amended vide U.P. Act No. 1 of 2004 and a proviso to sub-section (2) of Section 37 was inserted stipulating that the affiliation could be granted by the Affiliating University for specified time. Thus, a comparative reading of amended Section 37 and Section 38 of the Universities Act, as it exists today, makes it clear that for affiliation from the Affiliating University under Section 37, there is a provision for grant of temporary affiliation for a period prescribed therein whereas for association with the Lucknow University as 'Associated College', which is governed by Section 38 of the Act, there is no concept of any temporary association or for association for a specified period of time. Not only this, Section 37 of the Act makes it obligatory to obtain prior sanction of the State Government whereas Section 38 of the Act does not stipulate any such condition.
Having considered the submissions advanced by the parties, I also find force in the contention of the petitioner that the judgment rendered by the Apex Court in the case of Maa Vaishno Devi Mahila Mahavidyalaya versus State of U.P. [(2013) 2 SCC 617] is not applicable at all in the facts and circumstances of the petitioner's case as it is related to the affiliation for the first time with an affiliating University or the Institution. Since the petitioners were granted association with the University without any stipulation, the petitioners' institution is fully eligible to admit the students, as is evident from clause 13.10 of the Statutes of University of Lucknow. There is no dispute in the fact that petitioners' Institution was granted affiliation for admission in B.Ed. Course for three consecutive and successive education sessions i.e. 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2012-13. Furthermore, the stand of the respondents that the Management Committee of the Institution was not approved is also not tenable in view of the fact that the Vice-Chancellor has already approved the Committee of Management with retrospective effect, w.e.f. 17.11.2009, for a period of five years. It may be added that while granting affiliation for academic session 2011-12 and 2012-13 vide letters dated 13.7.2011 and 26.6.2012, there was no stipulation of any kind upon the Institution.
In view of the above detailed discussion, the Court directs the opposite parties to display the name of the petitioners' Institution i.e. Dr M.C. Saxena College of Education, Lucknow, in the ongoing process of counselling for B.Ed. Course for the education session 2013-14 and allot students, as admissible, to the petitioners' institution, after completion of necessary formalities.
With the aforesaid observations and directions, this writ petition is disposed of finally.
Dt.2.7.2013
lakshman
