M. F. SALDANHA, J. ( 1 ) I have heard the learned advocates who represent the petitioners as also the learned Government Advocate. It has been pointed out to the Court that there are 4 more writ petitions, which are pending and which have not been listed today, but the papers have been called for from the Office and the same are treated as having been listed with the present group. This order will cover the entire group of petitions. ( 2 ) THE common point involved in this group of writ petitions is as to whether the Vocational Courses which the petitioners have done in Kerala and in respect of which the Board of Vocational Higher Secondary Examinations, Government of Kerala had conducted the examinations can be treated as equivalent to the Course of this State. The question has arisen because the petitioners joined the institutes in Bangalore for the purpose of doing their General Nursing Course in the State and as inevitably happens, when the question of the first set of examinations came up, the matter came to the notice of the respondent-authorities. Admittedly, the petitioners who hail from the State of Kerala have not done the qualifying P. U. C. Examination of this State, and therefore, the authorities were required to consider as to whether the Vocational Course in respect of which they have produced the Certificates can be treated as equivalent to the P. U. C. Course. The matter had earlier been referred to the Government because at that time one of the questions that arose was whether the students who have done the qualifying examinations with subjects such as Arts, Science and Commerce can be admitted and the Government after considering the matter answered the question in the affirmative to the effect that students who have done the qualifying examinations with Arts, Science and Commerce could be admitted. Learned Government Advocate points out to the Court that once again the question regarding the Vocational Course was specifically referred to the Government and the Government has issued a clarification to the Director that the Vocational Course cannot be treated as equivalent to the P. U. C. Course. It was for this reason that the respondent-authorities have refused to recognise the course as being sufficient qualification for admission to the General Nursing Course. It was for this reason that the respondent-authorities have refused to recognise the course as being sufficient qualification for admission to the General Nursing Course. ( 3 ) THE usual plea has been put forward before this 'court once again that the petitioners joined the institutions in good faith and that they have spent a considerable amount of money and that they have spent a lot of time in pursuing the Course and that on the verge of the examinations that their admissions are cancelled. These are the usual facts which are pleaded in all these cases and I am in total agreement with the learned Government Advocate who has pointed out to the Court that the correct procedure to be followed in that all educational institutions shall first ascertain from the concerned authorities as to what precisely the correct position under the rule is, before making admissions. This Court has come across all sorts of institutions indiscriminately admitting students and thereafter creating difficulties with the Departments and the Authorities by putting forward the usual pleas that the students will suffer and hardship would be caused to them. ( 4 ) IDENTICAL pleas are put forward before this Court and repeatedly before the Boards, Universities, and Departments and Courts are being requested to make concessions, Virtually, on humanitarian grounds, for the sake of students, since the predominant concern has always been for the welfare of the students, such concessions are often made. Because this is happening, it is treated. as a total and general licence to break the Rules and breach them and in the confidence that something will always be done for the students. The Court is required to balance several equities, but to my mind, the Courts will have to ruthlessly deal with the persons in charge of the Management of these institutions if this state of affairs will have to stop. ( 5 ) AS far as the present cases are concerned, the position is not so bad, in so far as the Rules themselves provide for the consideration of equivalence to the P. U. C. Examination. ( 5 ) AS far as the present cases are concerned, the position is not so bad, in so far as the Rules themselves provide for the consideration of equivalence to the P. U. C. Examination. The petitioners' learned advocate demonstrates to me that in the first instance these Courses are conducted by the State authorities which to my mind would be very much in favour of the petitioners because if the examinations in question have been conducted by any domestic Boards or Private Authorities, this Court would have straight away rejected the plea. What is also sought to be relied on is that the students who have done these Courses have to take up their studies in various Universities and for the purpose of examining the eligibility criteria, the Universities have carefully assessed the examination and the authorities conducting it etc. , and have treated it as equivalent to the P. U. C. Course. As many as 17 Universities have done this and to my mind, this is something which the Court can safely rely on it, The Universities are responsible bodies and unless they are satisfied after examining the syllabus as also the standard and the examination recognition would not have, been granted. The last circumstance which the petitioners want to place heavy reliance on is the fact that the Indian Nursing Council itself has also accepted this Course as equivalent. It is in this background that the petitioners' learned advocates have submitted that as far as the present batch of writ petitions are concerned that their admissions should be treated as having been regular and that they should be permitted to take the various examinations and complete their course. ( 6 ) LEARNED Government Advocate has submitted that the Karnataka Nursing Council is an independent authority and that it is not subordinate to any of the Universities. He has also pointed out to me that this Bangalore University has so far not granted any recognition to this Course. This appears to be factually correct, but we are not very much concerned with the aspect of subordination, because in the list to Universities that have recognised the Course, one finds that the Karnataka University has done this and this happens to be one of the older and better Universities in the State. This appears to be factually correct, but we are not very much concerned with the aspect of subordination, because in the list to Universities that have recognised the Course, one finds that the Karnataka University has done this and this happens to be one of the older and better Universities in the State. ( 7 ) LEARNED Government Advocate has also submitted that the Directorate is fully entitled to frame its own Rules and standards and consequently, since the petitioners have desired to do the course which is supervised by the Directorate, that they must conform to the Rules and directions which the University insists on. There is considerable justification in the submission, because, I do agree that if the Directorate were to set up certain requirements, merely because, the other authorities may permit lower standards is no ground that this standard should be watered down. The only aspect which needs to be taken into consideration is that if several educational authorities/universities have accepted a course as equivalent course, then it pre-supposes the fact that the Course and the examination are of the requisite standard and under these circumstances, in the light of the material that has been pointed out in this judgment, this would be an appropriate case for the Government to reconsider this matter. Undoubtedly, that reconsideration may take a little time. But to my mind, it ought to be done at the very earliest so that, the students who are pursuing the course should have notice with regard to what precisely the decision of the Government is, and secondly, the various. bodies who are conducting these courses should also be aware of this position why the Government is taking this decision. This Court recognises that in all the cases where students are indiscriminately admitted in breach of the existing requirements or without obtaining prior sanction from the authorities, that the Government should promulgate appropriate steps for taking penal action against the persons responsible. I have no hesitation in holding that there are several instances in the State where education is being used as a business or a trade with the sole purpose of making money and that in all these instances, time has come for taking appropriate penal action. I have no hesitation in holding that there are several instances in the State where education is being used as a business or a trade with the sole purpose of making money and that in all these instances, time has come for taking appropriate penal action. ( 8 ) THE present set of petitioners as indicated by me are permitted to pursue the course in question and they have been permitted to take the examinations. In the circumstances, it would be in the fitness of things that admissions to be treated as having been regularised and that they be permitted to complete the Course provided they comply with all the other requirements. ( 9 ) PETITIONS accordingly succeed to this extent. ( 10 ) RULE made absolute with no order as to Costs. Rule made absolute. --- *** --- .