High Court of KeralaWP(C)/20250/2010disposed of

Shareena.E.M. v. Mahatma Gandhi University

2015-02-24Honourable Mr.Justice K.Vinod Chandran5 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN TUESDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2015/5TH PHALGUNA, 1936 WP(C).No. 20250 of 2010 (E) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S):

--------------- SHAREENA E.M., I SEMESTER, M.TECH, APPLIED ELECTRONICS, MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING, MUTTOM, THODUPUZHA.

BY ADV. SRI.A.A.ABUL HASSAN.

RESPONDENT(S):

--------------

1. MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, PRIYADARSHINI HILLS, ATHIRAMPUZHA, KOTTAYAM, PIN-686 560, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR,

2. CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATIONS, MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, PRIYADARSHINI HILLS, ATHIRAMPUZHA, KOTTAYAM, PIN-686 560.

3. THE ACADEMIC COUNCIL, MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, PRIYADARSHINI HILLS, ATHIRAMPUZHA, KOTTAYAM, PIN-686 560.

4. THE PRINCIPAL, UNIVERSITY OF COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING, MUTTOM, THODUPUZHA-685 587.

BY SRI. T.A. SHAJI, SC, M.G.UNIVERSITY BY SRI.VARUGHESE M.EASO, SC, M.G.UNIVERSITY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24-02-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

rvs.

WP(C).No. 20250 of 2010 (E) APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS :

----------------------- EXT. P1TRUE COPY OF THE DEGREE CERTIFICATE FOR THE MASTRATE DEGREE, DATED 27/10/2004 ISSUED BY THE BHARATIDASAN UNIVERSITY.

EXT. P2TRUE COPY OF THE PROSPECTUS FOR M.TECH (APPLIED ELECTRONICS) PROGRAMME.

EXT. P3TRUE COPY OF THE SAID LETTER DATED 04/01/2010 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

EXT. P4TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED 28/11/2009 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

EXT. P5TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED 16/02/2010 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT.

EXT. P6TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 29/03/2010 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT.

EXT. P7TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 21/06/2010 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT.

EXT. P8TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 28/06/2010 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE VICE CHANCELLOR, M.G. UNIVERSITY.

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS :

------------------------ NIL.

/TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE RVS.

K. Vinod Chandran, J.

==================================== ==================================== Dated this the 24th day of February, 2015.

JUDGMENT

1. Petitioner was an aspirant to the M.Tech. (Applied Electronics) Course conducted by the respondent University. Petitioner applied for the same, on the basis of the qualification in M.Sc. (Industrial Electronics), obtained from Bharthidasan University, Tamil Nadu.

2. It is trite that, any qualification from an outside University has to be first treated as equivalent to that granted by the University, in which the admission is sought, before such admissions are regularized.

3. In the present case, the petitioner applied for M.Tech. (Applied Electronics) under the respondent University, for which the essential qualification was B.Tech. Degree in Electronics/Applied Electronics/Electrical & Electronics Engineering/Bio-medical Instrumentation/Bio-medical Engineering/M.Sc.Electronics/Applied

-:2:- Electronics/M.Sc.Applied Electronics and Computer Technology/Master of Applied Sciences (Bio-medical Instrumentation)/M.Sc.Physics with minimum aggregate of 60% marks. M.Sc. (Industrial Electronics) was not one of the eligible qualification for seeking admission to the M.Tech. Course. It is also seen from the counter affidavit filed by the respondent University that, the petitioner had then filed an application for equivalency, which was under consideration of the Academic Council. The above writ petition was filed, when the 1st semester examination of the M.Tech. course was scheduled and the petitioner was prevented from appearing in the examination.

4. This Court had permitted the petitioner to provisionally appear in the examination, by order dated 1.11.2010. Since the University contend in the counter affidavit dated 4.10.2010 that, the question of equivalency of the petitioner's qualification in M.Sc. (Industrial

-:3:- Electronics) is under consideration of the Academic Council, definitely, the petitioner's continuance in the course, would depend upon the orders passed by the Academic Council. The writ petition would stand closed, since the petitioner has not chosen to challenge any prejudicial decision by the Academic Council. No costs.

K. Vinod Chandran, Judge.

sl.