Judgment :- 1. Petitioner highlights inadequacies in the field of higher education, and seeks redress therefor. The issues raised are matters of moment, touching on the fortunes of students in Universities. 2. Petitioner is the father of two under graduate students, in the St.Berchman's College, Changanacherry. He would say that his sons have the mental equipment to attain distinction in their studies, but that instruction imparted in the college, falls far below the level required, thus impairing prospectus of his wards. Petitioner submits that he cannot afford private tuition for his sons. Fall in standards is attributed to teachers failing in their duty, and diverting time and attention to private tuition. Dr.Vincent Panikulangara, counsel for petitioner referred to Ext.P1 and reports of Commissions to stress the point. 3. Statute 17(1) of the First Statutes of the Kerala University, which at the time, applied to the Gandhiji University (Mahatma Gandhi University) is referred to, by counsel. It reads: "All teachers shall be full time teachers and they shall devote their entire time to the work of the college and shall not without the written permission of the Principal engage themselves in any other work of a remunerative nature". Contrary to this, some teachers engage themselves in taking private tuition, neglecting their basic duties, according to petitioner. He would say that he had brought this to the notice of the 1st respondent and other authorities including Manager of the College, but to no avail. 4. In answer, the Manager-4th respondent submits that, he had made enquiries, but that did not find evidence of any malpractice. The cryptic counter affidavit of the Manager reminds one, of the proverbial ostrich burying its head. 1st respondent has been a little more explicit in the counter affidavit. It is stated that, as long as Statute 17 remains operative, teachers of private colleges cannot be prevented from taking private tuition. If so, the question would be, how long should Statute 17 remain, if it cannot meet the requirements of the situation. The Government however has stated that they are looking into the matter. 5. Every civilised society, in every age of human history, has given high priority to education and treated youth as the promise for the future. Teacher - taught relationship, a rich concept had influenced thinking of generations. 6. The State Government of Kerala themselves realised the importance of a properly oriented system. 5. Every civilised society, in every age of human history, has given high priority to education and treated youth as the promise for the future. Teacher - taught relationship, a rich concept had influenced thinking of generations. 6. The State Government of Kerala themselves realised the importance of a properly oriented system. A Commission was set up in March, 1984 to inquire into the working of the Kerala University and to make recommendations, with a view towards excellence in learning. The Commission, was headed by Dr.Malcomm S.Adiseshayya, Fellow, Madras Institute of Development Studies. The other members were Rev.Dr.P.T.Chandy, formerly Vice Chancellor, Gorakhpur University and Prof. V.V.John, formerly Vice Chancellor, Jodhpur University. The Commission went into various aspects, of higher education including infrastructure for Universities and Colleges, governance of University peer assessment of University departments, and the like. A report was submitted on May 3,1985. Commission noted that higher education on the whole was in poor shape. It identified many causes for this. Fall in academic standards, paucity of trained teaching staff, organised employees' unions and process of politicisation were some of those. The Commission noticed, with a degree of anguish, that under-qualified persons were put on teaching jobs. It also felt that there was considerable pressure on the existing staff. The spurt in the number of students seeking higher education, was also noticed by the Commission. While in the year 1977,56,516 students sought admission into the Pre-degree Course, by 1982 the figure had arisen to 1,10,774. Infrastructure had not been developed, to meet the growing needs. The Adiseshayya Commission made recommendations touching several aspects. I do not propose to go into these, but would only refer to such of those relevant to the case on hand. The Commission recommended that: (a) Teachers of under-graduate courses must improve quality through University Grants Commission Faculty Improvement Programme. (b) That there should be recruitment of outside teachers and visiting professors. (c) That admission to Universities should be restricted on a selective basis to improve quality of higher education. (d) That examination should be rescheduled. Another Commission, the "High Level Committee on Education and Employment" of the State Planning Board, also made an assessment of the situation. That Committee, referring to Wilbur Schramm, noticed the changed situation: "Two millennia ago the student came to Aristotle; now Aristotle comes to the student" through distance education". (d) That examination should be rescheduled. Another Commission, the "High Level Committee on Education and Employment" of the State Planning Board, also made an assessment of the situation. That Committee, referring to Wilbur Schramm, noticed the changed situation: "Two millennia ago the student came to Aristotle; now Aristotle comes to the student" through distance education". It suggested, inter alia, establishment of an Open University on the lines in Britain, under the Royal Charter. Elsewhere also, Open Universities have been set up. Australia, Japan, Canada, United States of America and U.S.S.R. are some of those countries. In India, the matter was examined by a Committee headed by Mr.G.Parthasarathi. The Open University concept and refinements in the existing University System were suggested. 7. The report of the High Level Committee of the State Planning Board made a specific recommendation in Volume H, Chapter IV, 4.7 as under: "The quality of teaching is the prime factor in ensuring good attendance as well as attention by students. The practice of undertaking private tuition by college teachers, though illegal, is rampant throughout the State. The tendency to conserve energy in order to expend it on lucrative private tuition is mainly responsible for non-teaching which is prevalent in many institutions. Unless the rules prohibiting private tuition by college teachers is strictly enforced it will not be possible to raise the standard of teaching". 8. The Government have not done much to implement the recommendations of the Commissions or to bring about changes in the area of higher education, though developing areas of excellence, was the recognised objective. Changes are required and they must be made. Level of teaching, qualitatively needs upgrading. Adisesheyya Commission had recommended that facilities offered by the University Grants Commission Faculty Improvement Programme could be utilised. The High Level Committee of the State Planning Board also suggested that an upgrading process, should be thought of on the lines, existing in the United States. The Association of American University Professors and such bodies of teachers offer assistance in this direction. The committee also felt that'political parties in the State will do yeomen service to future generations, if they leave out students from the political arena and allow them to follow their academic pursuits in peace'. Betterment and not change for change should be the guarding factor. Inadequacies in the system must be remedied. The committee also felt that'political parties in the State will do yeomen service to future generations, if they leave out students from the political arena and allow them to follow their academic pursuits in peace'. Betterment and not change for change should be the guarding factor. Inadequacies in the system must be remedied. The pace of remedial measures or re-thinking, in an area that calls for vast changes has been slow or even hesitant. The problem must be handled with drive and a sense of direction. With passage of time, the inadequacies will further weaken the system. Each year many young pupil pass through the portals of Universities into tomorrow's hopes hardly equipped for it. Policy makers, whose prime concern it should have been to remedy the situation, have" apparently paid very little attention to these aspects. Virtually a sense of apathy has been shown. I make these observations based on figures contained in Appendix V to the report of the Adisesheyya Commission. The table given below, illustrates the point. Table:#1 170 questionnaire were issued to Ministers, Members of Parliament and Members of Legislative Assembly. Not one of them responded. Likewise, 185 questionnaire were issued to University authorities and affiliated bodies. Only 16 responded. Response was thus 8.6%. Response of teachers also was not very different. 1320 questionnaire were issued. 156 responded. The response rate was 11 %. Among the general category, response was the highest. 300 questionnaire were issued. 72 responded, and the rate of response was 24%. This reflects a very gloomy picture. The first category consisting of Ministers, Members of Parliament and Members of Legislative Assembly, form a group which should normally be sensitive to the problem. Not one among the 170 chose to respond. It is apt in this context to notice the findings of Commission that, politicisation has been taking place at the same time. The policy makers and those credited with expertise and sensitivity should react and inter-act more sensitively, comprehensively and purposefully. It is worth noticing that greater concern is seen displayed elsewhere. A Ministry of Human Resources has been set up in this country. It will be unfortunate, if the State with the highest literacy rate, assumes such a passive posture. To look to the future is a gift of statesmanship. It is worth noticing that greater concern is seen displayed elsewhere. A Ministry of Human Resources has been set up in this country. It will be unfortunate, if the State with the highest literacy rate, assumes such a passive posture. To look to the future is a gift of statesmanship. If one fails in this, it will be denying a glorious future, and failing in the trust that history imposes on the present day towards future. 9. As noticed earlier, the Government or the Universities have not responded to the problem which the petitioner has presented. Private tuition by itself may not be objectionable. But private tuition, neglecting the basic duty of a teacher is a serious matter. Solutions must be found with institutional perspectives. Petitioner has named persons and instances. It is hoped that the Government will act responsively, and with a sense of urgency. Legislation if it is called for, should be made or existing laws effectively implemented. Provisions like R.47 of the Kerala Service Rules should be sufficient to deal with some of the problems. It is not for this court to indicate policies. But, it is hoped that the Government will take necessary steps in the right direction. The petition pending before the 1st respondent Ext.P1 is not seen disposed of. 1st respondent will take it up and pass meaningful orders thereon as expeditiously as possible. Writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid direction. No costs.