Kerala High Court
P.P. Mohammed Yaseen vs University Of Calicut on 9 March, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN
TUESDAY, THE 09TH DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 18TH PHALGUNA, 1942
W.P(C).No.4498 OF 2021(J)
PETITIONER:
P.P. MOHAMMED YASEEN
S/O. AHAMMEDKUTTY, AGED 69 YEARS
(CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING TRUSTEE,
MOULANA EDUCATIONAL CHARITY TRUST,
P.O KOTTAYI, TIRUR), MANAGER,
MOULANA COLLEGE OF ARTS,SCIENCE AND COMMERCE,
CHENNARA P. O,
TIRUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT,
PIN - 676 561.
BY ADVS.
SRI. VINOD RAVINDRANATH
SMT. MEENA. A.
SRI. K. C. KIRAN
SMT. M. R. MINI
SRI. M. DEVESH
SRI. ASHWIN SATHYANATH
SRI. ANISH ANTONY ANATHAZHATH
SRI. THAREEQ ANVER
RESPONDENTS:
1 UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT
REPRESENTED BY REGISTRAR,
UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT,
P. O CALICUT UNIVERSITY,
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT,
PIN - 673 635.
2 REGISTRAR
UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT,
P. O CALICUT UNIVERSITY,
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT,
PIN - 673 635.
SRI. P.C SASIDHARAN, S.C, CALICUT UNIVERSITY
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
09.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P(C).No.4498 OF 2021
2
JUDGMENT
The petitioner, who is the Chairman and the Managing Trustee
of Moulana Educational Charity Trust, which is running Moulana
College of Arts and Science and Commerce, which is a self-
financing college affiliated to the 1st respondent University, which
commenced its functioning in the year 2013, has filed this writ
petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ
of mandamus commanding the respondents to grant affiliation to
the petitioner College for 4 Post-graduate courses mentioned in
Ext.P2, for the next academic year itself. The petitioner has also
sought for a writ of mandamus commanding the 1 st respondent to
consider and pass appropriate order on Ext.P3 representation,
within a time limit.
2. On 22.02.2021, when this writ petition came up for
admission the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner confined
the reliefs sought for in the writ petition as one for consideration of
Ext.P3 representation by the 1st respondent University, within a
time limit. The learned Standing Counsel for the University sought
time to get instructions.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the
W.P(C).No.4498 OF 2021
learned Standing Counsel for the University.
4. The petitioner made Ext.P2 application dated
29.10.2019 for starting Post-graduate courses. On that application
the University issued Ext.P1 communication dated 13.11.2020,
which reads thus:-
"Kind attention is invited to the reference cited 2 nd,
wherein the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala has directed
University to consider and take decision on the
applications submitted by your college for starting new UG
(B.A Sociology, B.Sc Psychology, B.SC Costume and
Fashion Designing and BSW) and PG (M.A English, MSW,
M.Com and M.Sc Clinical Psycology) programmes for the
academic year 2020-21, in accordance with law, within a
period of two months.
In compliance with aforesaid judgment, the District Level
Inspection Commission (DLIC), which conducted
inspection in your college commenced B.A Sociology and
B.Sc. Psycology programmes for the academic year 2020-
21 and 2021-22 and the recommendation was forwarded
to Govt. as stipulated in CUFS 1977. The DLIC has no
recommended the other programmes viz. B.Sc Costume
and Fashion Designing, BSW, M.A English, MSW, M.Com
and M.Sc Clinical Psycology stating reasons that i) the
required facilities are not available ii) qualified faculties
are not available and iii) books in the library are not
sufficient.
Hence, your application for the programmes which were
W.P(C).No.4498 OF 2021
not recommended by the DLIC, is rejected. However you
can submit fresh application for additional programmes for
the academic year 2021-22 and 2022-23 as per the
provisions in the CUFS 1977, after rectifying the defects
mentioned above."
5. The petitioner, after curing the deficiencies noted in
Ext.P1, submitted Ext.P3 compliance report dated 03.02.2021
seeking re-consideration of Ext.P2 application for affiliation.
6. The learned Standing Counsel would submit that the
University shall taken an appropriate decision on Ext.P2
application, after considering Ext.P3 compliance report. The
learned Standing Counsel would submit that for consideration of
compliance report, at least three months time is required.
7. Having considered the submissions made by the learned
counsel on both sides, this writ petition is disposed of directing the
1st respondent to consider Ext.P2 application made by the
petitioner and take an appropriate decision, after considering
Ext.P3 compliance report within a period of three months from the
date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.
8. In State of U.P. v. Harish Chandra [(1996) 9 SCC
309] the Apex Court held that no mandamus can be issued to
direct the Government to refrain from enforcing the provisions of
W.P(C).No.4498 OF 2021
law or to do something which is contrary to law. In Bhaskara Rao
A.B. v. CBI [(2011) 10 SCC 259] the Apex Court reiterated that,
generally, no Court has competence to issue a direction contrary to
law nor can the Court direct an authority to act in contravention of
the statutory provisions. The courts are meant to enforce the rule
of law and not to pass the orders or directions which are contrary
to what has been injected by law.
9. Therefore, in terms of the direction contained in this
judgment, the 1st respondent shall take an appropriate decision in
the matter, strictly in accordance with law, taking note of the
relevant statutory provisions and also the law on the point.
No order as to costs.
Sd/-
ANIL K. NARENDRAN,
JUDGE
SPR
W.P(C).No.4498 OF 2021
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION FROM
CALICUT UNIVERSITY DATED 13.11.2020.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE AFFILIATION APPLICATION
RESUBMITTED DATED 29/10/2019.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION GIVEN BY
THE COLLEGE TO THE UNIVERSITY DATED
03.02.2021.
RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS: NIL.
