Worldwide Knowledge Foundation vs Council Of Architecture
2021 Latest Caselaw 2351 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                PRESENT

              THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN

     THURSDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 1ST MAGHA, 1942

                      W.P.(C) No.25143 OF 2020(P)

PETITIONER:

               WORLDWIDE KNOWLEDGE FOUNDATION
               MGM TECHNOLOGICAL CAMPUS, ATHIPPATTA,
               EDAYUR P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT
               REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
               EEVARGHESE YOHANNAN,
               AGED 72 YEARS, S/O. MR. YOHANNAN GEEVARGHESE,
               SECRETARY, WORLD WIDE KNOWLEDGE FOUNDATION,
               MGM TECHNOLOGICAL CAMPUS, ATHIPPATTA,
               EDAYUR P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT
               REPRESENTED BY ITS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER - AHINUS
               H., AGED 42 YEARS, S/O. H.HALEEFATHUDEEN, RESIDING AT
               SAFA,
               UMAYANALLOOR P.O., KOLLAM -691 589.

               BY ADVS.
               SRI.MOHAN JACOB GEORGE
               SMT.P.V.PARVATHY (P-41)
               SMT.REENA THOMAS
               SMT.NIGI GEORGE

RESPONDENTS:

      1        COUNCIL OF ARCHITECTURE,
               INDIA HABITAT CENTRE, CORE-6A,
               1ST FLOOR, LODHI ROAD, NEW DELHI-110 003
               REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR.

      2        PRESIDENT,
               COUNCIL OF ARCHITECTURE,
               INDIA HABITAT CENTRE, CORE-6A,
               1ST FLOOR, LODHI ROAD,
               NEW DELHI-110 003.

               R1-2 BY ADV. SHRI.P.VIJAYAKUMAR, ASG OF INDIA

               SMT. KRISHNA S., CENTRAL GOVERNMENT COUNSEL

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
21.01.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P.(C) No.25143 OF 2020(P)
                                 -2-


                              JUDGMENT

The petitioner, which applied before the 1 st respondent

Council of Architecture seeking approval of new Architecture

College, namely, MGM College of Architecture at Valanchery, for

conducting B.Arch Course. The petitioner has filed this writ petition

under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of

certiorari to quash Ext.P5 order dated 04.11.2020 issued by the 1 st

respondent; and a writ of mandamus commanding the 1 st

respondent to reconsider Ext.P3 along with Ext.P8, within a time

limit to be fixed by this Court. The petitioner has also sought for

an order directing the 1st respondent to grant approval for B.Arch

Course, within a time limit to be prescribed by this Court.

2. On 17.11.2020, when this writ petition came up for

admission, this Court issued urgent notice on admission by speed

post and through e-mail to the respondents.

3. A statement has been filed by respondents 1 and 2

through the learned Assistant Solicitor General of India, opposing

the reliefs sought for in this writ petition. The petitioner has also

filed a reply affidavit, producing therewith Exts.P9 to P11 as

additional documents.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also W.P.(C) No.25143 OF 2020(P)

the learned Assistant Solicitor General of India for respondents 1

and 2.

5. The issue that arises for consideration in this writ

petition is as to whether any interference is warranted on Ext.P5

order, whereby the appeal filed by the petitioner against the

rejection of the application for approval of new Architecture

College for conducting B.Arch Course, for the academic year 2020-

21, stands dismissed.

6. In exercise of the powers conferred by clauses (e), (g),

(h) and (j) of sub-section (2) of Section 45 read with Section 21 of

the Architects Act, 1972, the 1 st respondent Council of

Architecture, with the approval of the Central Government, made

the minimum standards of Architectural Education Regulations,

1983. Regulation 8 deals with standards of staff, equipment,

accommodation, training and other facilities for technical

education. Appendix-B of the Regulations deals with designation,

pay scale, qualification, etc., required for faculty positions and

Appendix-C deals with physical facilities.

7. The petitioner submitted Ext.P1 application dated

31.01.2020 for approval of new Architecture College for conducting W.P.(C) No.25143 OF 2020(P)

B.Arch course, for the academic year 2020-21. The 1 st respondent

vide letter dated 14.07.2020 required the petitioner to submit

compliance report on academic and infrastructure facilities. The

petitioner submitted a compliance report dated 28.07.2020, which

was considered by the Executive Committee of the 1 st respondent

at its meeting held on 23.08.2020. Having considered the

compliance report, the Executive Committee decided to reject the

application made by the petitioner with the following observations;

"1) Required cadre-wise Faculty as per Council Regulations, 1983 is not identified by the Institution.

2) One Professor apart from Principal/Head is not identified by the Institution as per Council Norms.

3) One Associate Professor and one more Assistant Professor are also not identified by the Institution as per Council Norms.

4) Copy of Land Use certificate (with translation) for Institutional use duly approved by competent local authority not submitted."

8. The decision taken by the Executive Committee of the

1st respondent was communicated to the petitioner on 27.08.2020,

as stated in the statement filed on behalf of respondents 1 and 2.

The Executive Committee at its 223 rd meeting held on 15.10.2020

decided to provide a final opportunity to the petitioner institution W.P.(C) No.25143 OF 2020(P)

and it was informed that an online inspection shall be conducted

by the Council. The said fact was informed to the petitioner vide

Ext.P2 communication dated 15.10.2020. The petitioner submitted

Ext.P3 appeal dated 21.10.2020 and the 1st respondent vide Ext.P4

communication dated 26.10.2020 informed the petitioner that an

online inspection will be conducted on 28.10.2020. Accordingly, an

online inspection was conducted. The recommendations of the

online Inspection Committee was considered by the Executive

Committee at its meeting held on 29.10.2020. Based on the

recommendations of the Inspection Committee, the Executive

Committee decided to reject the appeal filed by the petitioner as

evidenced by Ext.P5 communication dated 04.11.2020, with the

following observations;

"(i) One of the faculty members listed was not available and could not be present; a different architect was identified and met the Inspection Committee. He had no teaching experience and was also running his practice. A few others also had their own practice, and one senior faculty member was associated with another institution for a reasonably long time. There was no consent letter from him to join the institution.

(ii) The Inspection Committee was not convinced that they would be in a position to join and continue as full-time teachers."

W.P.(C) No.25143 OF 2020(P)

9. On receipt of Ext.P5 communication dated 04.11.2020

of the 1st respondent, the petitioner submitted Ext.P8

representation dated 07.11.2020, seeking reconsideration of the

decision taken by the Executive Committee of the 1 st respondent

on 29.10.2020. Along with the writ petition, the petitioner has

produced Ext.P6 consent letter dated 25.06.2020 issued by

Ar.Shajith and Ext.R6(a) offer letter dated 01.06.2020 issued by

the petitioner to Ar.Shajith for the post of Associate Professor; and

Ext.P7 consent letter dated 25.06.2020 issued by

Ar.K.A.Shamsudeen, expressing his consent to join duty, as and

when required by the petitioner. In the said letter, it is stated that

he had attended an interview for the post of Principal/Professor/

Associate Professor/Assistant Professor in the proposed MGM

College of Architecture, on 20.05.2020.

10. The specific stand taken in the statement filed on behalf

of respondents 1 and 2 is that the consent letter of

Ar.K.A.Shamsudeen was not even submitted in the online appeal

sent through email on 22.10.2020. In the hard copy of the appeal

submitted by the petitioner, which was received in the office of the

1st respondent on 03.11.2020, the consent letter of W.P.(C) No.25143 OF 2020(P)

Ar.K.A.Shamsudeen dated 21.10.2020 was unsigned. In the

consent letter of Ar.K.A.Shamsudeen produced along with the writ

petition as Ext.P7, which is one dated 25.06.2020, he attended the

interview on 20.05.2020, whereas in the unsigned consent letter

enclosed along with the hard copy of the appeal, the date of

interview is mentioned as 21.10.2020. Ar.Dhaneesh V. Jacob,

another faculty shown by the petitioner was not available during

the online inspection, as he was stated to be under quarantine,

owing to COVID-19. It was in such circumstances that the

Executive Committee decided to reject the appeal filed by the

petitioner.

11. In Medical Council of India v. The Principal, KMCT

Medical College [(2018) 9 SCC 766] it was contended before

the Apex Court that the inspection was not properly conducted.

Repelling the said contention, the Apex Court held as follows;

"15. We do not deem it necessary to deal with the submission made on behalf of the College regarding the inspection not being properly conducted. This Court has repeatedly said that a decision taken by the Union of India on the basis of a recommendation of an expert body regarding the inadequacy of facilities in medical colleges cannot be interfered with lightly. Interference is permissible only when the colleges demonstrate W.P.(C) No.25143 OF 2020(P)

jurisdictional errors, ex facie perversity or mala fide. [See: Manohar Lal Sharma v. Medical Council of India (2013) 10 SCC 60 and Medical Council of India v. Kalinga Institute of Medical Sciences (2016) 11 SCC 530]. As no case is made out by the College for interference with the inspection report, we decline the request of Mr.Sibal for remand of the matter to the High Court."

12. The application made by the petitioner for the academic

year 2020-21 was originally rejected by the Executive Committee

of the 1st respondent Council on 23.08.2020. The appeal filed by

the petitioner was also rejected by the Executive Committee in its

meeting held on 29.10.2020. The said decision of the Executive

Committee is based on the recommendation made in the report of

the Inspection Committee, which conducted online inspection, on

account of COVID-19 pandemic. Any interference on the findings

of the Executive Committee of the 1 st respondent Council, which

are based on the recommendation made by the Inspection

Commission, is legally permissible under Article 226 of the

Constitution of India only when the petitioner demonstrates

jurisdictional errors, ex facie perversity or malafides. In the

absence of any vitiating circumstances, no interference is

warranted on the findings of the Executive Committee of the 1 st W.P.(C) No.25143 OF 2020(P)

respondent in its decision taken on 29.10.2020.

In the result, the writ petition fails and the same is

accordingly dismissed.

No order as to cost.

Sd/-

ANIL K. NARENDRAN JUDGE bpr W.P.(C) No.25143 OF 2020(P)

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 31.1.2020 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE IST RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P1(A) COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 31.1.2020 EVIDENCING PAYMENT MADE ALONG WITH EXT.P-1

EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF LETTER DATED 15.10.2020 OF THE IST RESPONDENT REJECTING THE APPLICATION.

EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 21.10.2020 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER.

EXHIBIT P4 COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 26.10.2020 OF THE IST RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P5 COPY OF COMMUNICATION OF THE IST RESPONDENT DATED 4.11.2020.

EXHIBIT P6 COPY OF THE CONSENT DATED 25.6.2020 ISSUED BY AR.SHAJITH.

EXHIBIT P6(A) COPY OF APPOINTMENT ORDER DATED 1.6.2020 ISSUED TO AR.SHAJITH.

EXHIBIT P7 COPY OF THE CONSENT DATED 25.6.2020 ISSUED BY AR.K.A.SHAMSUDHEEN.

EXHIBIT P8 COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 7.11.2020 FILED BY THE PETITIONER SEEKING RECONSIDERATION.

EXHIBIT P9 COPY OF CIRCULAR NO.6296/AC-B/KUHS/2013 DATED 24/09/2018 ISSUED BY THE KERALA UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES.

EXHIBIT P10 COPY OF CIRCULAR NO.6296/AC-B/KUHS/2013 DATED 28/11/2018 ISSUED BY THE KERALA UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES.

EXHIBIT P11 COPY OF CIRCULAR NO.6296/AC-B/KUHS/2013 DATED 15/05/2019 ISSUED BY THE KERALA UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES.

W.P.(C) No.25143 OF 2020(P)