Karnataka High Court
The Registrar vs The Bethel Medical Institute Of ... on 21 April, 2021
Author: Satish Chandra Govindaraj
W.A. NO.358 OF 2020
And Connected matters
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF APRIL, 2021
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA
AND
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ
WRIT APPEAL NO.358 OF 2020 (EDN-REG)
C/W
WRIT APPEAL NO.345 OF 2020 (EDN-AD)
WRIT APPEAL NO.347 OF 2020 (EDN-AD)
WRIT APPEAL NO.349 OF 2020 (EDN-AD)
WRIT APPEAL NO.379 OF 2020 (EDN-AD)
WRIT APPEAL NO.380 OF 2020 (EDN-AD)
WRIT APPEAL NO.381 OF 2020 (EDN-RES)
WRIT APPEAL NO.382 OF 2020 (EDN-AD)
WRIT APPEAL NO.383 OF 2020 (EDN-AD)
IN WRIT APPEAL NO.358 OF 2020
BETWEEN:
THE REGISTRAR
THE RAJIV GANDHI UNIVERSITY
OF HEALTH SCIENCE
4TH 'T' BLOCK JAYANAGAR
BANGALORE - 560041 ... APPELLANT
(BY SRI. SACHIN.B.S, ADVOCATE-PH)
AND:
1. THE BETHEL MEDICAL INSTITUTE OF NURSING
AND PHYSIOTHERAPY AND
AT SY NO.5/3 BETHEL CAMPUS
PREETHINAGARA, LAGGERE
BENGALURU-560058
REP. BY ITS PRESIDENT
MR. SUNNY DANIEL
S/O DANIEL AGED
ABOUT 40 YEARS
W.A. NO.358 OF 2020
And Connected matters
2
2. THE BETHEL MEDICAL MISSION
COLLEGE OF PHYSIOTHERAY
AT SY NO.5/3 BETHEL CAMPUS
PREETHINAGARA, LAGGERE
BENGALURU-560058
REP. BY ITS PRESIDENT
MR. SUNNY DANIEL
S/O DANIEL AGED
ABOUT 40 YEARS
3. THE HOSMAT COLLEGE OF
NURSING, AT SY NO.5/2
HOSMAT CAMPUS PREETHI NAGARA
LAGGARE, BENGALURU-560058
REP. BY ITS PRESIDENT
MR. SUNNY DANIEL
S/O DANIEL AGED
ABOUT 40 YEARS
4. THE HOSMAT COLLEGE OF
PHYSIOTHERAPY, AT SY NO.5/2
HOSMAT CAMPUS, PREETHINAGARA
LAGGARE, BENGALURU-560058
REP. BY ITS PRESIDENT
MR. SUNNY DANIEL
S/O DANIEL AGED
ABOUT 40 YEARS
5. THE HOSMAT COLLEGE OF
ALLIED HEALTH SCIENCE
AT SY NO.5/2, HOSMAT CAMPUS
PREETHINAGARA, LAGGARE
BENGALURU-560058
REP. BY ITS PRESIDENT
MR. SUNNY DANIEL
S/O DANIEL AGED
ABOUT 40 YEARS
6. THE GAYATHRI DEVI
COLLEGE OF NURSING
OFFICE AT BETHEL CAMPUS
PREETHINAGARA, LAGGERE
BENGALURU-560058
INSTITUTION IS AT KOTTIGEPALYA
OFF TUMAKURU-MYSURU RING ROAD
BENGALURU-560091
REP. BY ITS PRESIDENT
W.A. NO.358 OF 2020
And Connected matters
3
MR. SUNNY DANIEL
S/O DANIEL
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
7. BENAKA CHARITABLE TRUST
AT SY NO.5/2, HOSMAT CAMPUS
PREETHINAGARA, LAGGARE
BENGALURU-560058
REP. BY ITS PRESIDENT
MR. SUNNY DANIEL
S/O DANIEL AGED
ABOUT 40 YEARS
8. MERLY PARA MEDICAL EDUCATION TRUST
AT SY NO.5/2, HOSMAT CAMPUS
PREETHINAGARA, LAGGARE
BENGALURU-560058
REP. BY ITS PRESIDENT
MR. SUNNY DANIEL
S/O DANIEL
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
9. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
DEPARTMENT OF MEDICAL EDUCATION
M.S. BUILDING, BENGALURU-560001
10. THE INDIAN NURSING COUNCIL
8TH FLOOR, NBCC CENTER
PLOT NO.2, COMMUNITY CENTER
OKHLA PHASE-1, NEW DELHI-110020
REP. BY ITS SECRETARY ... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. A.S. PONNANNA, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR
SMT.LEELA P. DEVADIGA, SRI. H.C.PRATHEEK AND
SRI. ARNAV A. BAGALWADI, ADVOCATES FOR R1 TO R8-PH;
SRI. S.S. MAHENDRA, AGA FOR R9-PH;
SRI. SHIVARUDRA, ADVOCATE FOR R10)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, 1961 PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE
IMPUGNED JUDGMENT DATED 28.02.2020 PASSED IN WP NOS.50150-
157/2019.
*****
W.A. NO.358 OF 2020
And Connected matters
4
IN WRIT APPEAL NO.345 OF 2020
BETWEEN:
THE REGISTRAR
THE RAJIV GANDHI UNIVERSITY
OF HEALTH SCIENCE
4TH 'T' BLOCK, JAYANAGAR
BANGALORE -560041 ... APPELLANT
(BY SRI. SACHIN.B.S, ADVOCATE-PH)
AND:
1. ARUN KUMAR.P
S/O PREMNATH.L
AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS
2. PRIYA.A
D/O ANNADURAI
AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS
3. ASHICK KETHIYON.J
S/O JOHN BESTER RAJ
AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS
4. MAHANTHI SHOBANA.A
D/O P. ARJUNAN
AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS
5. GOKUL RAJ.M
S/O MUNIYAPPAN
AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS
6. SUNIL KUMAR.R
S/O A. RAJBABU AGED
ABOUT 21 YEARS
7. JOY X. JONAH
S/O JOSEPH XAVIER. J
AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS
8. FAHMEEDA AKHTAR
D/O G.H. HUSSAIN YATTO
AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS
RESPONDENTS NO.1 TO 8 ARE
STUDENTS OF I YEAR B.SC.,
OTT IN THE HOSMAT COLLEGE
OTT BETHEL MEDICAL INDO
NEPAL ACADEMY, BANGALORE - 58
W.A. NO.358 OF 2020
And Connected matters
5
9. HOSMAT COLLEGE OF NURSING
SCIENCES BETHEL MEDICAL
INDO NEPAL ACADEMY,
NEAR LAGGARE BRIDGE
BANGALORE - 560058 ... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. D.R. RAVISHANKAR, ADVOCATE OF LEX NEXU FOR R9-VC;
R1 TO R8-VIDE ORDER DATED 29.09.2020, NOTICE ARE
TREATED AS GOOD SERVICE.
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF HIGH COURT
OF KARNATAKA ACT, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT
DATED 28.02.2020 PASSED IN WP NO.48193/2019.
*****
IN WRIT APPEAL NO.347 OF 2020
BETWEEN:
THE REGISTRAR
THE RAJIV GANDHI UNIVERSITY
OF HEALTH SCIENCE
4TH 'T' BLOCK, JAYANAGAR
BANGALORE-560041 ... APPELLANT
(BY SRI. SACHIN.B.S, ADVOCATE-PH)
AND:
1. AASHA .M
D/O MUTHUSAMY.M
AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS
2. ABIRAMI. I
D/O IYYANAR.N
AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS
3. AGALYA.B
D/O BALAMUREUGAN.R
AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS
4. AJAY.R
S/O RAJENDRAN.N
AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS
W.A. NO.358 OF 2020
And Connected matters
6
5. ANBAZHAGAN.K
D/O M. KRISHNAN
AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS
6. E. POONGODY
D/O JELUMALAI
AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS
7. JANCI. R
D/O G. RAVI
AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS
8. KAYALVIZHI. K
D/O KATHIRAVAN.S
AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS
9. M.R. SAJINA JENIFER
D/O P. MOHAN BABU
AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS
10. MANIKANDAN. L
S/O LAKSHMANAN
AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS
11. MERLIN FELCITY. J
D/O A. JESURAJ
AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS
12. MONISHA. K
D/O M. KALIYAPERUMAL
AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS
13. PADMAVATHI. P
D/O PALANI PILLAI
AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS
14. R. KOWSALYA
D/O RAVISHANKAR. M
AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS
15. SAKTHIVEL. M
S/O MURUGAN. C
AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS
16. SARANYA. S
D/O S. SAGAYANATHAN
AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS
W.A. NO.358 OF 2020
And Connected matters
7
17. SARITHA. M
D/O R. MAHADEVAN
AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS
18. SRI. PRIYADHARSHINI. S
D/O K. SRIDHAR
AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS
19. VELLAYAMMAL.T
D/O THANGARASU. C
AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS
20. VIDHYASRI. S
D/O A. SAMIDURAI
AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS
21. VIJAYALAKSHMI. V
D/O VADIVELU
AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS
RESPONDENTS NO.1 TO 21 ARE
STUDENT OF I YEAR B.SC.
(NURSING) IN GAYATHRI DEVI
COLLEGE OF NURSING
BANGALORE-58
22. GAYATHRI DEVI COLLEGE OF NURSING
HOSMAT BETHEL ROAD
NEAR LAGGARE BRIDGE
BANGALORE-560058
REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL ... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. D.R. RAVISHANKAR, ADVOCATE OF LEX NEXUS FOR R22-VC;
R1 TO R21-VIDE ORDER DATED 29.09.2020, NOTICES ARE
TREATED AS GOOD SERVICE)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE HIGH
COURT OF KARNATAKA ACT, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED
JUDGMENT DATED 28.02.2020 PASSED IN WP NO.48172/2019.
*****
IN WRIT APPEAL NO.349 OF 2020
BETWEEN:
THE REGISTRAR
RAJIV GANDHI UNIVERSITY
OF HEALTH SCIENCE
W.A. NO.358 OF 2020
And Connected matters
8
4TH 'T' BLOCK, JAYANAGAR
BENGALURU - 560041 ... APPELLANT
(BY SRI. SACHIN.B.S, ADVOCATE-PH)
AND:
1. ABHISHEK.V
S/O VIAJAYAN.S
AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS
2. KARTHIKEYAN.S
S/O SAKTHIVEL.T
AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS
3. THOMAS.K
S/O KODANDA PARI.G
AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS
4. PUGALARASU.D
S/O V. DHANDAYUTHABANI
AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS
5. SAKARIAYA .B
S/O A. BABU
AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS
6. PRAKASHRAJ .K
S/O P. KALAICHELVAN
AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS
7. DINESH BABU
S/O INNOCENT. R
AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS
8. LOKESH .S
S/O SARAVANAN
AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS
9. LOKESHWARAN.R.S
S/O R. SANKAR
AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS
10. GOPI.R
S/O K. RAVI
AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS
W.A. NO.358 OF 2020
And Connected matters
9
11. D. SANTHOSH
D/O KUMAR. T
AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS
12. D. EBENEZER SAMUEL
S/O DEVAN
AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS
13. ABHILASH.K.N
S/O NANJE GOWDA.K.P
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS
14. SHIVANAPPA
S/O DYAVANNA
AGED ABOUT 24
15. GIRISH.S
S/O SHIVANNA
AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS
16. KIRAN.P
S/O PRASANNA. P
AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS
17. JEBHIN.J.B
S/O K. BHASI
AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS
RESPONDENTS NO.1 TO 17 ARE
STUDENTS OF I YEAR B.M.I.T.
LATERAL ENTRY IN THE HOSMAT COLLEGE
OF BMIT/BETHEL MEDICAL INDO
NEPAL ACADEMY, BANGALORE-58
18. HOSMAT COLLEGE OF BMIT/
BETHEL MEDICAL INDO NEPAL ACADEMY
HOSMAT-BETHEL ROAD
NEAR LAGGARE BRIDGE
BANGALORE-560058
REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL ... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. D.R. RAVISHANKAR, ADVOCATE OF LEX NEXUS FOR R18-VC;
R1 TO 17 VIDE ORDER DATED 29.09.2020, NOTICE ARE
TREATED AS GOOD SERVICE)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF KARNATAKA
HIGH COURT ACT, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT
DATED 28.02.2020 IN WP NOS.48132-148/2019.
*****
W.A. NO.358 OF 2020
And Connected matters
10
IN WRIT APPEAL NO.379 OF 2020
BETWEEN
THE REGISTRAR
THE RAJIV GANDHI UNIVERSITY
OF HEALTH SCIENCE
4TH 'T' BLOCK JAYANAGAR
BANGALORE-560041 ... APPELLANT
(BY SRI. SACHIN.B.S, ADVOCATE-PH)
AND:
1. SHAMINA SANGEETHA. G
D/O GUNASEKARAN.S
AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS
2. MUNEERA MAHIM.P
D/O MAHIM. P
AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS
3. LIPOKWATI JAMIR
S/O TEKALEMBA JAMIR
AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS
4. PARVAIZ AHMAD DAR
S/O G.H. MOHAMMAD DAR
AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS
5. ANGEL BLESSY.R
D/O RUBAN.B
AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS
6. KARWANDE ANUSHKA.A
D/O AVINASH
AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS
7. CHANDRU.R
S/O RAVI
AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS
8. SRITHAR RAJ.A
S/O AYIL RAJ.A
AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS
W.A. NO.358 OF 2020
And Connected matters
11
9. ASIF.V.A
S/O ABOOBAKAR.V.A
AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS
10. S. PAVITHRA
D/O T.SANKAR
AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS
11. AL AMEEN.S
S/O B. SHAHUL HAMEED
AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS
12. SNEKA.A
D/O G. KANNAN
AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS
13. PRIYANGA.P
D/O V. PANDIYAN
AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS
14. KEERTHIGA.M
D/O MAHENDIRAN.D
AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS
15. RABIYA BANU
D/O NAYAZ AHMED
AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS
16. PRAISON.R
S/O RAMESH.J
AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS
17. SHARUMATHI.B
D/O M. BALRAJ
AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS
18. JOHNY PHILIP.J
S/O JAYASINGH ROBERT
AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS
19. SHALINI.R
D/O RAVIKUMAR.M
AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS
20. DEBASHISH DAS
S/O MRINAL DAS
AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS
W.A. NO.358 OF 2020
And Connected matters
12
21. PREMKUMAR.E
S/O ELUMALAI
AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS
22. ARYA
D/O AJITH.S
AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS
23. JESLIN JOY.M
S/O D. MOHAN RAJ
AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS
24. AVI KUMAR
S/O AJITH KUMAR
AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS
25. KHARAT ANGEL ROBIN
S/O ROBIN KHARAT
26. TRILOCHANA.E
D/O ESWAR RAO. E
AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS
27. SUMITHA.C.H
D/O MADAN.C.H
AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS
28. SAUGAT NEUPANE
D/O KRISHNA PRASAD NEUPANE
AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS
RESPONDENTS NO.1 TO 28 ARE
STUDENTS OF 1 YEAR
PHYSIO STHERAPY IN THE
HOSMAT HOSPITAL EDUCATIONAL
INSTITUTE BETHEL MEDICAL
INFO NEPAL ACADEMY
BANGALORE-560088
29. HOSMAT HOSPITAL EDUCATIONAL
INSTITUTE BETHEL MEDICAL INDO
NEPAL ACADEMY
HOSMAT-BETHAEL ROAD
NEAR LAGGERE BRIDGE
BENGALURU-58.
REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL ... RESPONDENTS
W.A. NO.358 OF 2020
And Connected matters
13
(BY SRI. D.R. RAVISHANKAR, ADVOCATE OF LEX NEXUS FOR R29-VC;
R1 TO R28- VIDE ORDER DATED 29.9.2020, NOTICES ARE
TREATED AS GOOD SERVICE)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF KARNATAKA
HIGH COURT ACT, 1961 PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED
JUDGMENT DATED 28.02.2020 PASSED IN WP NOS.48234-261/2019.
*****
IN WRIT APPEAL NO.380 OF 2020
BETWEEN:
THE REGISTRAR
THE RAJIV GANDHI UNIVERSITY
OF HEALTH SCIENCE
4TH 'T' BLOCK, JAYANAGAR
BANGALORE-560041 ... APPELLANT
(BY SRI. SACHIN.B.S, ADVOCATE-PH)
AND
1. SUNITHA.S
D/O SASHIDHARAN.S
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS
2. BENJUNMONGLA
D/O NKLEN JAMIR
AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS
3. KALUNG AMI
D/O KALUNG GRAYU
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS
4. JOSIT JOSE
S/O JOSE CHELLANGOTT
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS
5. VYSHKH.M.V
S/O VIJAYAN
AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS
6. BIHANI SHRESTHA
D/O BADRI SHRESHTHA
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS
W.A. NO.358 OF 2020
And Connected matters
14
7. PRATIBHA YOGESHWAR
D/O MANAK NATH YOGESHWAR
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS
8. MOTIRAM BHATTA
S/O GANESH PRASAD BHATTA
AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS
9. M. MADHAN RAJ
S/O R. MURUGESAN
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS
10. ADHAV MITALI KISHOR
D/O PARTIBHA AGED
ABOUT 30 YEARS
11. SUBRAT KUMAR BHOLA
D/O RAMESH CHANDRA
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS
12. ASHUTOSH PRADHAN
D/O BALARAM PRADHAN
AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS
13. UPPATURI HARINATH
D/O UPITCHAIAH
AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS
14. KAJOL VAISHNAV
D/O NARENDRA VAIDHNAV
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS
15. RUKSHAR BEGUM
D/O MD. SARTULLA SHAH
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS
16. AMAN SACHDEVA
S/O ASHOK SACHDEVA
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS
17. YOHIMKI LYNGDHO
S/O ALLAN SHULLAI
AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS
18. LAVANYA.R.S
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS
W.A. NO.358 OF 2020
And Connected matters
15
19. RAKESH KUMAR YADAV
S/O SHREE NAGENDRA PARSAD
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS
RESPONDENTS NO.1 TO 19 ARE
STUDENTS OF I YEARS MASTER DEGREE
IN PHYSIO THERAPY IN THE
HOSMAT COLLEGE OF PHYSIOTHERAPY/
BETHEL MEDICAL INDO NEPAL ACADEMY
DISTRICT BANGALORE-560058
20. HOSMAT COLLEGE OF
PHYSIOTHERAPPY/BETHEL
MEDICAL INDO NEPAL ACADEMY
NEAR LAGGARE BRIDGE
BANGALORE-560 058
REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL ... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.D.R. RAVISHANKAR, ADVOCATE OF LEX NEXUS FOR R20-VC;
R1 TO R19-VIDE ORDER DATED 29/09/2020, NOTICES ARE
TREATED AS GOOD SERVICE)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE
KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED
ORDER DATED 28.02.2020 IN WP NOS.48215-233/2019.
*****
IN WRIT APPEAL NO.381 OF 2020
BETWEEN:
THE REGISTRAR
THE RAJIV GANDHI UNIVERSITY
OF HEALTH SCIENCE
4TH 'T' BLOCK, JAYANAGAR
BANGALORE-560041 ... APPELLANT
(BY SRI. SACHIN.B.S, ADVOCATE-PH)
AND:
1. ANNA FLORENCE
D/O K. RAVI KUMAR
AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS
2. ASHWINI. P
D/O PICHAMUTHU. P
AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS
W.A. NO.358 OF 2020
And Connected matters
16
3. BERLIN SHEEBA. K.R.
D/O T. KUMAR DHAS
AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS
4. ELIZA NINGOMBAM
D/O N. SHARATCHANDRA
AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS
5. EVANGELIN PRAISEY. J.L.
D/O S. JOHN LIVINGSTON
AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS
6. JAYA VINCELIN
S/O N. JAYA SINGH
AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS
7. JEBIN. R
S/O RASALAIAN.K
AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS
8. K.M. POOJA PANDEY
D/O BHANU PRATAP PANDEY
AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS
9. MANOJ. M
S/O MANI.K
AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS
10. MOHAMMED SHAHNAD
S/O MOHAMMED ISHAK
AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS
11. MOUSIKA. K
D/O KUMAR. T
AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS
12. OMKAR HUNDARAGI
S/O PRAKASH
AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS
13. PONNARASU
S/O MARLIN
AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS
14. POONAM PRASAD
S/O GULAB CHAND PRASAD
AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS
W.A. NO.358 OF 2020
And Connected matters
17
15. PRAISCY. R.D.
D/O T. RAJAPPA
AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS
16. PRAVEEN JAYAKUMAR. R
S/O RAJA
AGED ABOUT 19 YEARS
17. RUBINA SETI MAHAR
D/O RAN BHADUR. B. K.
AGED ABOUT 21 YEARS
18. SHARON CHAUDHARY
D/O PR. CHETNATH CHAUDHARY
AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS
19. SOHAN SANJAY SANGAMANAVAR
S/O MANGAL SINGH CHAUDHARY
AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS
20. MEHZIL SHABIR
D/O SHABIR AHAMAD PEER
AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS
21. ANANTH KUMAR
S/O SINGHESWARSAH
AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS
22. VINITHA CHANDNI
D/O SUBODHA KUMAR SAH
AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS
23. YAMINA CHAUDHARY
D/O MANGAL SINGH CHAUDHARY
AGED ABOUT 18 YEARS
RESPONDENTS NO.1 TO 23 ARE
STUDENTS OF I YEAR B.SC., (NURSING)
IN THE HOSMAT COLLEGE OF NURSING
BETHEL MEDICAL INDO NEPAL ACADEMY
BANGALORE-560 058.
24. HOSMAT COLLEGE OF NURSING
SCIENCE BETHAL MEDICAL INDO
NEPAL ACADEMY, NEAR LAGGARE BRIDGE
BANGALORE-560058 ... RESPONDENTS
W.A. NO.358 OF 2020
And Connected matters
18
[
(BY SRI.D.R. RAVISHANKAR, ADVOCATE OF LEX NEXUS FOR R24-VC;
R1 TO R23-VIDE ORDER DATED 29.09.2020, NOTICES ARE
TREATED AS GOOD SERVICE)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF HIGH COURT
OF KARNATAKA ACT, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT
DATED 28.02.2020 PASSED IN WP NO.48148/2019.
*****
IN WRIT APPEAL NO.382 OF 2020
BETWEEN:
THE REGISTRAR
THE RAJIV GANDHI UNIVERSITY
OF HEALTH SCIENCE
4TH 'T' BLOCK, JAYANAGAR
BANGALORE-560041 ... APPELLANT
(BY SRI. SACHIN.B.S, ADVOCATE-PH)
AND:
1. CRUSIYA
D/O RAVIKUMAR
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS
2. ELIZABETH THOMAS
D/O THOMAS. V.M.
AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS
3. G.J. SUSEELA
D/O G. JACOB
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS
4. JANET JASMINE.J
D/O JEYANANDHAN.M
AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS
5. LEENA NAZARETH
D/O ANTONA FHARASI NAZARETH
AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS
6. SAJITH. S
S/O SIVASANKARAPILLAI.K
AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS
W.A. NO.358 OF 2020
And Connected matters
19
7. TINTU. T
D/O THANKACHAN
AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS
8. YALLESHKUMAR HUKKERI
S/O REVAPPA
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS
9. SURYA PRABHA
D/O UDAYABHANU.P.G.
AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS
10. KEZIAH.P
D/O A.P. ASHOKAN
AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS
11. NANDHINI.S
D/O SELVAM.A
AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS
12. NASRIN BANU
D/O ABDUL MAJEETH
AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS
13. PANTHAM MADHULATHA
D/O SEETHSRAMULU
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS
14. BISMA PARVAIZ
D/O PARVAIZ AHMAD PINCHOO
AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS
15. HOSMAT COLLEGE OF NURSING
BETHEL MEDICAL INDO NEPAL ACADEMY
NEAR LAGGARE BRIDGE
BANGALORE-560058
REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL ... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.D.R. RAVISHANKAR, ADVOCATE OF LEX NEXUS FOR R15-VC;
R1 TO R4-VIDE ORDER DATED 29.09.2020, NOTICES ARE
TREATED AS GOOD SERVICE)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF HIGH COURT
OF KARNATAKA ACT, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT
DATED 28.02.2020 PASSED IN WP NO.48201/2019.
*****
W.A. NO.358 OF 2020
And Connected matters
20
IN WRIT APPEAL NO.383 OF 2020
BETWEEN:
THE REGISTRAR
THE RAJIV GANDHI UNIVERSITY
OF HEALTH SCIENCE
4TH 'T' BLOCK, JAYANAGAR
BANGALORE-560041 ... APPELLANT
(BY SRI. SACHIN.B.S, ADVOCATE-PH)
AND:
1. ANNAMMA VINCENT
D/O VINCENT JOHN
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS
2. PATIL DEENA BENEDICKT
D/O BENEDICKT PATIL
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS
3. PREMA MIRANDA
D/O REMEND MIRANDA
AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS
4. MARIA DIYOG D SOUZA
D/O DIYOG P.D. SOUZA
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS
5. RUBY VINOD JOHN
D/O VINOD JOHN
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS
6. CHRISTIAN NIMI SAMUYEL
D/O SAMUYEL
AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS
7. BHUKYA NAGAMANI
D/O BHUKYA BALOJI
AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS
8. SANDEEP.T.S
S/O THILAKAN
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS
9. SEENA THOMAS
D/O THOMAS.T.S
AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS
W.A. NO.358 OF 2020
And Connected matters
21
10. LIGY JOHN
D/O G.JOHN
AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS
11. BIJI T. VARGHESE
D/O THOMAS VARGHESE
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS
12. SONA RAJAN
D/O RAJAN.K.R
AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS
13. ANITHA PAPPACHAN
D/O PAPPACHAN.E
AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS
14. JOISY JOSEPH
D/O JOSEPH
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS
15. BINI.A.V
D/O VARKRY A.K.
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS
16. DARLY VARGHESE. V
D/O V.P. VARGHESE
AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS
17. JOLLY JOSEPH
D/O JOSEPH.M.V
AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS
18. BIJU VARKEY
D/O VARKRY.A.K
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS
19. JESSY.P.J
D/O JAMES.P.V
AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS
20. MILU ABRAHAM
D/O ABRAHAM
AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS
21. PREEMA P.M. ABRAHAM
D/O ABRAHAM
AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS
W.A. NO.358 OF 2020
And Connected matters
22
22. SHRISHAIL BAGODI
S/O LAXMAN BAGODI
AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS
23. MESHIN JEYA BLESSY. V
D/O VISWANATHAN. R
AGED ABOUT 22 YEARS
24. JOSNA MATHEW
D/O MATHEW
AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS
25. UMBREEN ZEHRA
D/O MOHD. YAQOOB RATHER
AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS
26. SUSMITA MAHAJAN
D/O RATHAN MAHAJAN
AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS
27. SUMIT K.R. SHOME
S/O NETAI SHONE
AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS
28. GOPA RANI SAHA
D/O GOPAL CH. SAHA
AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS
29. SANGITA BHOWMIK
D/O MONORANGAN BHOWMIK
AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS
30. POUSHALI BARDHAN
D/O BEBABRATA BARDHAN
AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS
31. NANDITA DAS
D/O RAKHAL DAS
AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS
32. JASUDA SARKAR
D/O RATHAN MAHAJAN
AGED ABOUT 24 YEARS
33. MANDIRA BARMAN
D/O MADHUSUDHAN BARMAN
AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS
W.A. NO.358 OF 2020
And Connected matters
23
34. REMYA.R
D/O VIJAYAN
AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS
35. BLESSY BENNY
D/O BENNY
AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS
36. JENISH MICHAEL
D/O P.J. MICHAEL
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS
RESPONDENTS NO.1 TO 36 ARE
STUDENTS OF 1 YEAR PB. BSC.
NURSING IN THE HOSMAT COLLEGE
OF NURSING/BETHEL MEDICAL INDO
NEPAL ACADEMY, BANGALORE 560058
37. BETHEL MEDICAL INSTITUTE OF
NURSING, BETHEL MEDICAL INDO
NEPAL ACADEMY, PREETHI NAGAR
NEAR LAGGERE BRIDGE
BANGALORE-560058 ... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.D.R. RAVISHANKAR, ADVOCATE OF LEX NEXUS FOR R37;
R1 TO R36-VIDE ORDER DATED 29.09.2020, NOTICES ARE
TREATED AS GOOD SERVICE)
THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE HIGH
COURT OF KARNATAKA ACT, PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED
JUDGMENT DATED 28.02.2020 PASSED IN WP NOS.48262-297/2019.
*****
THESE WRIT APPEALS COMING ON FOR HEARING ALONG WITH
ORDERS AND HAVING BEEN RESERVED FOR ORDERS ON 09.03.2021,
THIS DAY, SURAJ GOVINDARAJ. J, PRONOUNCED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
1. The Rajiv Gandhi University is before this Court
challenging the common order passed by the learned
Single Judge in W.P.Nos.50150/2019 c/w 45577/2018,
W.A. NO.358 OF 2020
And Connected matters
45727/2018, 20786/2019, 20790/2019, W.P.Nos.
48132/2019, 48148/2019, 48172/2019, 48193/2019,
48201/2019, 48215/2019, 48234/2019, 48262/2019 and
48298/2019.
2. W.P.Nos.50150/2019 c/w 45577/2018, 45727/2018,
20786/2019, 20790/2019 had been filed by the colleges,
whereas W.P.Nos. 48132/2019, 48148/2019,
48172/2019, 48193/2019, 48201/2019, 48215/2019,
48234/2019, 48262/2019 and 48298/2019 had been
filed by the students of the aforesaid colleges challenging
the order passed by the respondents-State dated
14.01.2019 withdrawing the affiliation to the aforesaid
colleges, to quash the decision of the Syndicate vide
resolution dated 29.06.2019 by virtue of which the
Academic Council had recommended for withdrawal of
the affiliation to the aforesaid colleges, for certiorari to
quash the decision of the Senate held on 27.5.2019, by
virtue of which it was resolved to withdraw the affiliation
to the said colleges and for quashing of affiliation
notifications dt. 18.10.2019 by virtue of which the said
W.A. NO.358 OF 2020
And Connected matters
colleges were disaffiliated by the Rajiv Gandhi University
of Health Sciences.
3. The students also, having challenged the same, had
sought permission to continue their studies in the said
colleges.
4. The learned Single Judge vide the aforesaid order dated
28.2.2020 allowed the said writ petitions by holding that
the aforesaid decision of the Senate dated 27.4.2019,
the resolution of the Syndicate dated 29.6.2019, the
notification issued by State Government dated
14.10.2019 and the disaffiliation notification dated
18.10.2019 were not in conformity with Section 48 of the
Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences Act, 1994
('Act' for short) on the ground that there was no notice
issued by the Syndicate to the petitioners, copy of the
notice and written statement was not sent to the
petitioner-colleges, no report was prepared after the
Inspector by the Local Inspection Committee (LIC), the
Senate has not held a proper enquiry, these going to the
root of the matter, the requirement of Section 48 not
W.A. NO.358 OF 2020
And Connected matters
having been fulfilled, the learned Single Judge allowed
the writ petitions filed by the colleges and directed the
University to approve the admissions of the students
relating to the academic years in question and issue
marks cards/certificates accordingly.
5. It is aggrieved by the same that the University is before
this Court challenging the aforesaid decision of the
learned Single Judge.
6. Sri.B.S. Sachin, learned counsel for the petitioner -
University submits that
6.1. The University received certain information that
fake marks cards belonging to the students of the
aforesaid colleges are being circulated, as such the
Vice-Chancellor constituted an Inspection team to
conduct surprise inspection of the premises.
6.2. The Inspection team conducted a surprise
inspection on 7.3.2018 and found certain
incriminating data stored in the computer
maintained in the office of the said colleges, which
W.A. NO.358 OF 2020
And Connected matters
led to a suspicion of tampering of the marks card
by the said colleges.
6.3. The Inspection team collected the material like hard
disk, etc., and handed over the same to the
University.
6.4. After going through the report of the Inspection
Team, the Vice-Chancellor constituted a team to
look into the material made available by the
Inspecting team; a technical committee was also
constituted, the said committees on going through
the said material and after holding an enquiry are
stated to have come to a prima facie conclusion
that the aforesaid colleges have indulged in
manufacturing fake marks card and making it
available to the students.
6.5. The Committee submitted a report on 23.8.2019 to
the Vice-Chancellor recommending a detailed police
investigation. Hence, the University registered a
W.A. NO.358 OF 2020
And Connected matters
complaint on 12.3.2018 in Crime No.0097/2018,
which was referred to CID for further investigation.
6.6. The Vice Chancellor thereafter placed the above
issues and the report of LIC before the Syndicate in
its 134th meeting held on 8.6.2018, which resolved
and directed that the said colleges not to admit
students for the academic year 2018-19, which
resolution was also published in the newspaper on
24.01.2019.
6.7. A motion was moved under Section 48(2) of the Act
by one of the Members of the Syndicate in 139th
meeting held on 11.1.2019 for withdrawal of the
affiliation thereupon, a show cause notice was
issued to the colleges calling upon them to furnish
explanation in terms of Section 48(3) of the Act.
6.8. The reply received from the said colleges was
considered by the Syndicate in its 140th meeting
held on 27.02.2019 and forwarded to the Academic
Council for consultation. The Academic Council in
W.A. NO.358 OF 2020
And Connected matters
its meeting held on 17.6.2019 concurred with the
proposal of the Syndicate, thereupon the Syndicate
submitted its report to Senate, the Senate in its
meeting 24.6.2019 considered the report of the
Syndicate and opined that the affiliation granted to
the said colleges is required to be withdrawn.
6.9. The matter was placed before the Syndicate in its
142nd meeting held on 29.6.2019 when the
Syndicate resolved to withdraw the affiliation,
which was sent to the Government on 7.8.2019.
The Government vide its order dated 14.10.2019,
approved the withdrawal of the affiliation and as
such, a notification came to be published on
18.10.2019 withdrawing the affiliation.
6.10. The entire procedure prescribed under Section 48
of the Act has been complied with, the finding of
the learned Single Judge that the same is not
complied with is erroneous and therefore, is liable
to be set-aside.
W.A. NO.358 OF 2020
And Connected matters
7. Sri.A.S.Ponnanna, learned counsel appearing for the
colleges would submit that
7.1. The entire matter has been conducted in such haste
without furnishing the documents relevant thereto
to the colleges.
7.2. The order passed by the learned Single Judge is
proper and correct. There is a blatant violation of
requirement of Section 48 of the Act.
7.3. The University ought to have awaited the outcome
of the investigation being conducted. By the hasty
action taken by the Syndicate, the Academic
Council and the Senate, the life and career of
thousands of students have been adversely
affected.
7.4. The colleges have been functioning from the year
2003 and there being no allegations against the
said colleges until the present allegations having
came up.
W.A. NO.358 OF 2020
And Connected matters
7.5. Thousands of students have graduated from the
said colleges and there was no complaint against
the colleges till now. He submits that the learned
Single Judge has rightly appreciated the blatant
violation of Section 48 of the Act and the order
passed by the learned Single Judge is proper and
correct.
8. Though the students who filed writ petitions have been
served in the Writ Appeals, most of them have not
entered appearance. On behalf of few students who
have entered appearance, Sri.D.R.Ravishankar, learned
counsel while making his submissions adopted the
submissions made by Sri.A.S.Ponnanna, Senior counsel
and submits that the persons who are affected are the
students. Even if the colleges have committed any error,
the students having been admitted into the colleges prior
to the public notice dated 24.1.2019, their interest
should not be adversely affected and the said students
ought to be provided with an opportunity to continue
their education in the said colleges.
W.A. NO.358 OF 2020
And Connected matters
9. Heard Sri.Sachin.B.S, learned counsel for the appellant,
Sri.A.S.Ponnanna, learned Senior counsel for the
Colleges, Sri.D.R.Ravishankar, learned counsel for the
students. Perused papers.
10. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and
perused the papers, the points that arise for our
consideration in these appeals are:
i) Whether the University has followed the
procedure under Section 48 of the Act?
ii) Whether the order passed by the
learned Single Judge requires any
interference?
iii) What order?
11. Section 45 deals with affiliation of the colleges. Said
section is reproduced hereunder for easy reference:
45. Affiliation of colleges:
(1) Colleges within the University Area may, on
satisfying the conditions specified in this section, be
affiliated to the University as affiliated colleges by the
University on the recommendations made by the State
Government.
(2) A college applying for affiliation to the University
shall send an application to the Registrar within the time
W.A. NO.358 OF 2020
And Connected matters
limit fixed by Ordinances and shall satisfy the Syndicate
and the Academic Council,-
(a) that it will supply a need in the locality, having
regard to the type of education intended to be provided
by the college, the existing provision in the
neighbourhood and the suitability of the locality where
the college is to be established;
(b) that it is to be under the management of a regularly
constituted governing body;
(c) that the strength and qualifications of the teaching
staff and the conditions governing their tenure of office
are such as to make due provision for the courses of
instruction, teaching or training to be undertaken by the
college;
(d) that the building in which the college is to be located
are suitable and that provision will be made in
conformity with the Ordinances for the residence in the
college or in lodging approved by the college, for
students not residing with their parents or guardians
and for the supervision and welfare of students;
(e) that due provision has been made or will be made
for a library;
(f) where affiliation is sought in any branch of
experimental science, that arrangements have been or
will be made in conformity with the Statutes,
Ordinances and Rules for imparting instruction in the
branch of science in a properly equipped laboratory or
museum;
(g) that due provision will, as far as circumstances may
permit, be made for the residence of the Principal and
members of the teaching staff in or near the college or
the place provided for the residence of students;
(h) that the financial resources of the college are such
as to make due provision for its continued maintenance
and efficient working; and
(i) that rules fixing the fees, if any, to be paid by the
students have been framed or will be framed.
W.A. NO.358 OF 2020
And Connected matters
(3) The application shall further contain an assurance
that after the college is affiliated, any transference of
management and all changes in the teaching staff and
all other changes which result in any of the aforesaid
requirements, not being fulfilled or continued to be
fulfilled, shall be forthwith reported to the Syndicate and
to the State Government or such authority as the
Government may specify.
(4) On receipt of a letter of application under sub-
section (2), the Syndicate shall,-
(a) direct a local inquiry to be made by a competent
person or persons authorised by the Syndicate in this
behalf in respect of such matters as may be deemed
necessary and relevant;
(b) make such further inquiry as may appear to it to be
necessary; and
(c) record its opinion after consulting the Academic
Council on the question whether the application should
be granted or refused, either in whole or in part, stating
the result of any inquiry under clauses (a) and (b).
(5) The Registrar shall within such time as the
Government may from time to time specify submit
application and all proceedings, if any, of the Academic
Council and of the Syndicate relating thereto to the
Government which, after such inquiry as may appear to
it to be necessary, shall make their recommendations
for the grant of the application or any part thereof or
refuse the application or any part thereof and the
University shall issue orders accordingly.
(6) Where the application or any part thereof is granted,
the order of the University shall specify the courses of
instruction in respect of which and the period for which
the college is affiliated, and where the application or any
part thereof is refused by the Government or the
University, the grounds of such refusal shall be stated;
Provided that on the recommendation of the
Government, permanent affiliation may be granted to a
college which was affiliated continuously for a period not
less than five years and fulfill all the conditions of
affiliation and attained the academic and administrative
standards prescribed by the University from time to
time.
W.A. NO.358 OF 2020
And Connected matters
(7) As soon as possible after the Government or the
University makes its order, the Registrar shall submit to
the Senate a full report regarding the application, the
action taken thereon under sub-sections (4) and (6) and
of all proceedings connected therewith.
(8) An application under sub-section (1) may be
withdrawn at any time before an order is made under
sub-section (5). (9) Where a college desires to add to
the courses of instruction in respect of which it is
affiliated, the procedure prescribed by sub-sections (2)
to (8) shall, so far as may be, followed.
(a) No admission of students shall be made by any new
college seeking affiliation to the University or by an
existing college seeking affiliation to a new course of
study to such course, unless, as the case may be,
affiliation has been granted to such new college or to
the existing college in respect of such courses of study.
(b) The maximum number of students to be admitted to
a course of study shall not exceed the intake fixed by
the University or the Government, as the case may be,
and any admission made in excess of the intake shall be
invalid;
(c) No student whose admission has become invalid
under clause (b) shall be eligible to appear nor shall be
presented by the college to appear at any examination
conducted by the University.
12. Section 48 of the Act deals with withdrawal of affiliation,
the said Section is reproduced hereunder for easy
reference:
48. Withdrawal of affiliation:
(1) The rights conferred on a college by affiliation may
be withdrawn in whole or in part or modified if the
college has failed to comply with any of the provisions of
sub-section (2) of section 45 or the college has failed to
observe any of the conditions of its affiliation or the
college is conducted in a manner which is prejudicial to
the interest of education.
W.A. NO.358 OF 2020
And Connected matters
(2) A motion for the withdrawal or the modifications of
such rights shall be initiated only in the Syndicate. The
member of the Syndicate who intends to move such a
motion shall give notice of it and shall state in writing
the grounds on which it is made.
(3) Before taking the said motion into consideration the
Syndicate shall send a copy of the notice and written
statement mentioned in sub-section (2) to the Principal
of the college concerned together with an intimation
that any representation in writing submitted within a
period specified in such intimation on behalf of the
college will be considered by the Syndicate. Provided
that the period so specified may, if necessary be
extended by the Syndicate.
(4) On receipt of the representation or on the expiry of
the period referred to in sub-section (3), the Syndicate
after considering the notice of motion, statement and
representation and after such inspection by any
competent person or persons authorised by it in this
behalf and such further inquiry as may appear to it to
be necessary and after consulting the Academic Council
shall make a report to the Senate.
(5) On receipt of the report under sub-section (4) the
Senate shall, after such further inquiry, if any, as may
appear to it to be necessary record its opinion in the
matter: Provided that no resolution of Senate
recommending the withdrawal of affiliation shall be
deemed to have been passed by it unless the resolution
has obtained the support of two-thirds of the members
present at a meeting of the Senate, such majority
comprising not less that one-half the members of the
Senate.
(6) The Registrar shall submit the proposal and all
proceedings, if any, of the Academic Council, the
Syndicate and the Senate relating thereto to 31 the
Government which after such inquiry, if any, as may
appear to it to be necessary, shall make, their
recommendations to the University which shall
thereafter make such order, as it deems fit.
(7) Where by an order made under sub-section (6), the
rights conferred by affiliation are withdrawn in whole or
in part or modified, the grounds for such withdrawal or
modification shall be stated in the order.
W.A. NO.358 OF 2020
And Connected matters
13. ANSWER TO POINT NO.1: Whether the University
has followed the procedure under Section 48 of the
Act ?
13.1. The affiliation of a college is governed by Section
45 of the Act. It is not in dispute that the
aforesaid colleges have been affiliated to the
University. The present dispute is only as regards
the disaffiliation of the said colleges.
13.2. It is required in terms of Section 48(2) of the Act
that a motion for withdrawal or modification of
affiliation can only be initiated in the Syndicate. A
member who intends to move such a motion is
required to give notice of it and state in writing
the grounds on which it is made.
13.3. In the 134th meeting of the Syndicate held on
6.6.2018 the Vice Chancellor had informed the
members of the Syndicate that the case
pertaining to the aforesaid colleges had been
referred to the COD to investigate into the
allegations of tampering. The report of the
W.A. NO.358 OF 2020
And Connected matters
Committee was placed before the Syndicate for
consideration. The Syndicate, in the very first
meeting, took a decision that until the police
investigation is completed, the affiliation of the
aforesaid colleges should not be extended.
13.4. A further decision was taken, in that since it was
alleged that the Bethel Group was conducting
certain Health Science Course affiliated to
Bharathiyaar University, disaffiliation process was
to be taken up against the said group of
Institutions. In the said meeting it was decided to
hand over all the registers to the police for
investigation, as also to stop admission of
students to the Bethel and Hosmat Group of
Institutions for the year 2018-19. Thus, it is clear
that even in the meeting dated. 8.6.2018 virtually
the decision to disaffiliate the said colleges had
been taken without even providing any notice or
opportunity to the said colleges. The non-
extension of affiliation would by itself amount to
W.A. NO.358 OF 2020
And Connected matters
disaffiliation. The said decision being taken
without there being a motion for withdrawal of
affiliation moved by the Member of the Syndicate,
let alone by giving a notice and/or by stating in
writing the grounds on which the said motion is
made.
13.5. It is in pursuance thereto that the decision of the
Syndicate taken in the meeting held on 8.6.2018
was published in a newspaper on 24.01.2019. It
is not understood as to why there was a delay of
more than seven months in the said publication.
13.6. In the 139th meeting of Syndicate held on
11.1.2019, the Vice-Chancellor vide section 48 (3)
had moved the motion for disaffiliation of the
Institutions coming under the Bethel Group of
Institutions.
13.7. The Vice-Chancellor informed the said meeting
that in the 134th meeting, the Syndicate had
decided to initiate the process of disaffiliation, and
W.A. NO.358 OF 2020
And Connected matters
as such, in terms of Section 48 of the Act, the
Vice-Chancellor is moving the motion for
disaffiliation of institutions attached to Bethel
Group. The Syndicate approved the said motion
in the said meeting. Even according to the Vice
Chancellor the syndicate had decided to
disaffiliated the colleges in the 134th meeting
much before the motion was moved in the 139th
meeting, This in our considered opinion is in
violation of Section 48(3) of the Act whereunder it
is categorically stated that before taking such
motion into consideration, the Syndicate is
required to send a copy of the notice and the
written statement mentioned in Section 48(2) to
the Principal of the college with an intimation that
any representation in writing submitted within the
specified period of such intimation of on behalf of
the college will be considered by the Syndicate.
13.8. Thus, the Syndicate could have only directed the
concerned to forward the aforesaid documents
W.A. NO.358 OF 2020
And Connected matters
requesting for a reply by the Principal of the
college, instead of doing so, a motion which was
moved for disaffiliation by the Vice Chancellor was
approved by the Syndicate in gross violation of
Section 48(3) of the Act.
13.9. In furtherance of the 139th meeting held on
11.1.2019, the University issued a show-cause
notice on 2.02.2019 enclosing the minutes of the
134th meeting of the Syndicate held on 8.6.2018
and the minutes of 139th meeting held on
11.1.2019. Surprisingly the said show cause
notice was not even accompanied by the motion
and/ or any written statement accompanying the
said motion. Thus, once again there has been
violation of Section 48(3) of the Act.
13.10. Some of the colleges replied to the said show-
cause notice. The same was taken up for
consideration in the 140th meeting of the
Syndicate held on 27.2.2019 as regards which the
W.A. NO.358 OF 2020
And Connected matters
decision of the Syndicate taken was to process the
disaffiliation.
13.11. A perusal of the said decision of the Syndicate
does not indicate any application of mind and/or
consideration of the representation given by the
aforesaid colleges. It appears that show cause
notice, inviting reply has been an empty formality
inasmuch as the reply of the colleges have not
been considered or adverted to in the decision
making process. This is in violation of Section
48(4) of the Act.
13.12. In furtherance of the decision taken in the 140th
meeting of the Syndicate, the matter was placed
before the Academic Council. The Academic
Council in the meeting held on 17.6.2019
recommended withdrawal of the affiliation granted
to the colleges of Bethel and Hosmat group of
institutions. Even this decision of the Academic
W.A. NO.358 OF 2020
And Connected matters
Council does not indicate any application of mind
or appreciation of the reply given by the colleges.
13.13. In furtherance of the decision of the Academic
council, the Syndicate in its 142nd meeting held on
22.06.2019 accepted the recommendation of the
Academic Council and placed the matter before
the Senate.
13.14. The Senate in its meeting held on 25.7.2019
resolved to withdraw the affiliation granted to the
colleges attached to Bethel and Hosmat Group of
Institutions. In our considered opinion, this is in
violation of Section 48(5) of the Act. The decision
of the Senate appears to be taken only on the
basis of the recommendation made by the Vice-
Chancellor. There is no independent application of
mind. There is no enquiry which has been
conducted by the Senate as required under
Section 48(5) nor is there any independent
opinion made known by the Senate.
W.A. NO.358 OF 2020
And Connected matters
13.15. The opinion of the Academic Council also is solely
based on the recommendation of the Vice-
Chancellor, the Academic Council has also not
conducted any independent or further enquiry as
required under Section 48 of the Act.
13.16. It is in furtherance of the said decision of the
Senate that a recommendation was made to the
Government. The Government also accepted the
said recommendation made by the Senate.
13.17. Even the acceptance by the Government does not
indicate any application of mind. There is a
violation of Section 48(6) of the Act which
requires the Government, if necessary to hold
such enquiry and thereafter make its
recommendation. No such enquiry has been held
by the Government also nor are any reasons
recorded as to why such an enquiry is not
required. Be that as it may, the order passed by
W.A. NO.358 OF 2020
And Connected matters
the Government also does not indicate any
application of mind.
13.18. In view of all the above, it is clear that almost
each and every provision and/or requirement
under Section 48 of the Act have been violated by
the University, the Syndicate, the Academic
council, the Senate and the Government.
13.19. The process and procedure not having been
followed, a serious decision of disaffiliation of
colleges has been taken by the aforesaid
authorities without even as much as providing a
hearing to the colleges in question. The
University cannot act in such a fashion.
Disaffiliating nearly seven colleges would affect
thousands of students without even hearing the
colleges and considering their representations.
The principles of natural justice have been grossly
violated in the entire process.
W.A. NO.358 OF 2020
And Connected matters
13.20. We are not expressing any opinion on the merits
of the matter, as regards the allegations made
against the colleges. we are only concerned with
the manner in which the process of disaffiliation
and/or a decision making as regards disaffiliation
was resorted to and exercised by the University,
in our considered view the Syndicate, Academic
Council, Senate and the Government are all in
violation of section 48 of the ct and the principles
of Natural Justice.
13.21. No person can be condemned without granting an
opportunity of hearing. This principle has been
grossly violated.
13.22. Hence we answer point no.1 by holding that
the University, Senate, Academic Council,
Syndicate and the state government have
not followed the procedure under Section 48
of the Act and had grossly violated the
principles of natural justice.
W.A. NO.358 OF 2020
And Connected matters
14. ANSWER TO QUESTION NO.2: Whether the order
passed by the learned Single Judge requires any
interference?
14.1. In view of our finding in respect of point No.1
above, there being gross violation of the
requirements of the Act, more particularly under
Section 48 thereof, the learned Single Judge having
appreciated the aforesaid issues, has rightly
allowed the writ petitions filed by the colleges, as
also the writ petitions filed by the students and
directed the University to approve the admissions
of the students and issue marks cards/certificates
accordingly.
14.2. We do not find any need to interfere with the said
well reasoned Judgment of the learned Single
Judge.
W.A. NO.358 OF 2020
And Connected matters
[[
15. ANSWER TO POINT NO.3: What Order?
15.1. In view of the above, the appeals stand dismissed.
The order dated 28.02.2020 passed by the learned
Single Judge stands confirmed.
Sd/-
JUDGE
Sd/-
JUDGE
ln.
