Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

LOORDHU AMMAL EDUATIONAL TRUST versus THE UNIVERSITY OF MADRAS REP. BY

High Court of Madras

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Loordhu Ammal Eduational Trust v. The University of Madras rep. by - Review Application No. 40 of 2005 [2005] RD-TN 345 (29 April 2005)



IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 29/04/2005

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.MARKANDEY KATJU, THE CHIEF JUSTICE AND

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE F.M.IBRAHIM KALIFULLA Review Application No. 40 of 2005

Loordhu Ammal Eduational Trust

rep. by its Seretary,

Chennai-17. ..... Applicant -Vs-

1. The University of Madras rep. by

its Registrar, Rajaji Salai,

Chepauk, Chennai-5.

2. The Director of Collegiate Education,

College Road, Chennai-6. ..... Respondents Prayer: Review Application against the order dated 20.4.2005 in W.A.No.838 of 2005.

For Applicant :: Mr.R.Krishnamurthi, senior

counsel for Mr.V.Ayyadurai

For Respondent-1 :: Mr.A.L.Somayaji, senior

counsel for Mr.Rajan.

:O R D E R



(Order of the Court was made by

The Hon'ble Chief Justice.)

This is a review application for reviewing our judgment dated 20.4.2005.

2. Mr.R.Krishnamurthi, learned senior counsel and Mr.V.Ayyadurai, learned counsel appearing for the review petitioner submitted that since recognition had been granted to the writ petitioner institution it was automatically entitled to affil he Madras University in view of section 14(6)(a) of the National Council for Teacher Education Act, 1993 which states:-

"Every examining body shall, on receipt of the order under sub-section (4),-- (a) grant affiliation to the institution where recognition has been granted."

3. Learned counsel relied on the Division Bench decision of this Court in Writ Appeal No.4204 of 2004 etc. batch (Bharatidasan University v. Dhanalakshmi Srinivasan). We have carefully perused the said judgment. That case really was concerne question whether no objection certificate was required from the State Government before affiliation could be granted by the University. The Bench held it was not required. However, learned counsel for the review petitioner has relied on some observations made in that judgment which are as follows:-

"Further the NCTE Act contains adequate provisions as regards granting of affiliation as automatic one in respect of institutions which have been granted with recognition by the NCTE."

4. In our opinion, the word 'automatic' used in the aforesaid judgment should not be treated to mean that the Madras University must blindly grant affiliation whenever an order of recognition by NCTE under the NCTE Act, 1993 is produced befo oubt section 14(6) says that the examining body, on receipt of the order under sub-section (4) of section 14, shall grant affiliation to the institution where recognition has been granted. However, this does not mean that as soon as an order of recogniti on from the NCTE is produced before the University it must close its eyes and straightaway grant affiliation.

5. In our opinion, when a recognition order of NCTE is produced before the University, the University can make a limited enquiry as to whether the Regional Committee before granting recognition followed the provisions of section 14(3)(a) of t, which states:- "On receipt of an application by the Regional Committee from any institution under sub-section (1), and after obtaining from the institution concerned such other particulars as it may consider necessary, it shall-- (a) if it is satisfied that such institution has adequate financial resources, accommodation, library, qualified staff, laboratory and that it fulfills such other conditions required for proper functioning of the institution for a course or training in t eacher education, as may be determined by regulations, pass an order granting recognition to such institution, subject to such conditions as may be determined by regulations."

6. It must be understood that a University is a centre of higher learning and naturally has to maintain its reputation and it will like to grant affiliation only to a college which has the proper facilities, qualified staff, financial resour

7. We make take a hypothetical case. Supposing a college which does not have the adequate facilities, qualified staff, financial resources etc., by manipulation or some fraud obtains a recognition certificate from the NCTE even though the pr er section 14(3)(a) has not been followed, and then it applies for affiliation to the Madras University, does this mean that the Madras University must close its eyes and even without making any enquiry on its own whether section 14(3)(a) was complied wi th must straightaway grant affiliation? Madras University is a prestigeous univesity which has produced outstanding scholars who have created a mark all over the world and we cannot accept the contention that Madras University must blindly grant affilia tion just because the recognition certificate by NCTE is produced before it. Of course, if in the limited enquiry as to whether before granting recognition the Regional Committee had followed the procedure mentioned in section 14(3)(a) the Madras Univers ity is satisfied that it was followed then Madras University will have to grant affiliation, but it can certainly make this limited enquiry before doing so. After all, the degree which will be granted will be of Madras University.

8. Learned counsel for the review petitioner submitted that the college concerned has all the facilities which are required. However in para 6 of its counter affidavit to the writ petition the University has alleged that out of the 8 teacher aff of the college only one is qualified while the others are not. We need not go into this controversy, as we are of the opinion that until affiliation is granted no college can admit students to a course which leads to a degree of the University. In th e present case the petitioner-college admitted students although affiliation has not been granted by the Madras University as yet. In our opinion, this was wholly illegal. We have already mentioned in our judgment dated 20.4.2005 that if this practice of admitting students even before affiliation is granted, is countenanced the result may be that if ultimately affiliation is not granted for some valid reason the students will be left in the lurch and may lose time and money. Hence in our opinion no admi ssion can be granted by a college until affiliation is first granted by the University, and consequently there cannot be any order of this Court permitting students to appear in the examinations when the college has not even been granted affiliation.

9. Learned counsel for the review petitioner submitted that there is deemed affiliation of the college. We do not accept this contention. There has to be an affiliation in fact and not a deemed affiliation.

10. For the reasons given above, this review petition is dismissed. No costs.

Internet: Yes.

Index: Yes.

ns.

To

1. The Registrar,

University of Madras,

Rajaji Salai,

Chepauk, Chennai-5.

2. The Director of Collegiate Education,

College Road, Chennai-6.




Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.