Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2003 DIGILAW 866 (KAR)

KUMARI JAYASHREE v. STATE OF KARNATAKA

2003-10-17

N.K.PATIL

body2003
N. K. PATIL, J. ( 1 ) THESE petitioners questioning the correctness of the impugned order dated 17-7-2003 bearing G. O. No. ED. 254 SHH 2002 on the file of respondent 1 vide Annexure-C and notification dated 24-7-2003 bearing No. PUC/sibbandi/category-2/2003-2004, on the file of respondent 2 vide annexure-D insofar as respondent 3-college is concerned, have presented this writ petition. ( 2 ) THE grievance made out by the learned Counsel in the instant petition is that, these petitioners are the residents of Chikkajogihalli, Kudligi Taluk, bellary District, who are students studying in I and II year Pre-University course in respondent 3-co!lege and the said college is running since from several years. Also submitted that it is shocking to know that the Government by its order dated 17-7-2003 shifted the Pre-University from Chikkajogihalli to Sringeri, Chikmagalur District. Immediately thereafter, they gave several representations to withdraw the notification. The same is not considered. In view of the in-action of the authorities for non-consideration of their requests and giving effect to the impugned order and notification as referred above, it is submitted that the Government has unilaterally passed the same without conducting any enquiry nor they have sought for any report from the competent Authorities before taking decision by the Government. Hence, the impugned order and notification by the respondents is contrary to the norms of the college, Board of Pre-University Education. Therefore, the petitioners were constrained to move this Court by way of filing writ petition. ( 3 ) THE principle submission canvassed by the learned Counsel for the petitioners is that, before taking decision, the Government has not appointed any expert committee to find the reality and study the true aspect of the matter. When the college is running since from several years and the students studying in the said college belong to economically weaker section and their parents have no sources for educating their children in any other places except respondent 3-college, if the college is shifted, they will be put to great hardship and inconvenience and they lose further studies particularly girls who are studying in I and II year Pre-University Course in the college. This aspect of the matter has not been taken into consideration by the respondent-Government before passing the impugned order. This aspect of the matter has not been taken into consideration by the respondent-Government before passing the impugned order. Further, he submitted that time and again the Principal of the college-respondent 3 sent several recommendations to appoint staff and lecturers to continue the course. The Government has failed deliberately. Due to non-availability of the necessary staff, the students have not taken admission and this has created problem for which the students are penalised for no fault. Further submitted that in respondent 3-college, about 15 students have taken admission to I year pre-University Course and 16 students have taken admission to II year pre-University Course. To substantiate his submission, he placed the endorsement issued by the then Principal of the college that these students have taken admission to Pre-University Course. The learned Counsel further submitted that the Government has taken decision without taking into consideration the mandatory norms of the Board of Pre-University education. When once the college is established, it is not feasible for the government to transfer the college from one place to another as the students will be put to hardship and inconvenience. Therefore, the impugned order and notification passed by the respondent are liable to be set aside. ( 4 ) PER contra, the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondent, has filed detailed statement of objections and submitted that the impugned order is in order and issued by the Government. The said impugned order and Government notification are issued in strict compliance with the mandatory provisions of the Pre-University Board and having regard to the norms of the said Board, the decision has been taken not only in respect of respondent 3-college but, totally the Government took decision on transfer of about nine colleges in the State from one place to another after taking into consideration the ground reality and the need to continue the colleges. Wherever need is there, the said decision is taken and accordingly the Government has issued order. Respondent 3-Government Pre-University college has been transferred to Sringeri Taluk, Chikmagalur, taking into consideration the need of that area and thereafter, a notification was issued on 24-7-2003 transferring the staff and Lecturers. Further, to substantiate his submission he has filed Additional statement of objections. Wherever need is there, the said decision is taken and accordingly the Government has issued order. Respondent 3-Government Pre-University college has been transferred to Sringeri Taluk, Chikmagalur, taking into consideration the need of that area and thereafter, a notification was issued on 24-7-2003 transferring the staff and Lecturers. Further, to substantiate his submission he has filed Additional statement of objections. The Assistant director attached to the respondent 2-Director of Pre-University Education board has made spot inspection to the college premises on 6-9-2003 to collect the information regarding the strength of the students and also other particulars such as, whether transportation facilities are available to the students studying in respondent 3-college, if it is shifted to Sringeri etc. As per his report, he submitted that only four students were admitted as on 15-7-2003, that too, without collecting admission fee as required under the admission Rules and dates in the receipt shows that they were erased and overwritten. To substantiate this, he placed the original receipt before the court. After careful perusal, it is seen that the said receipts are written in pencil and no one has signed the receipts. Only there is acceptance of Rs. 10, rs. 15 etc. However, it reveals that the said report of the Assistant Director that, on 23-7-2003 two more students have been admitted without admission fees and registration fees and on 24-7-2003, 15 bogus admissions have been made. In these cases, no admission and registration fees is collected and the applications have been filled by some local volunteers but neither the parents nor the students have signed the applications. In the application, the age of the students are in the age group of 20 and 43 age. ( 5 ) FURTHER, it is submitted that it is the apprehension of these petitioners that if the college is shifted to some other place, they will be put to great hardship and inconvenience. They will have to face transportation difficulties. The competent officer who has sworn the affidavit has filed detail objection statement stating that there are more Pre-University colleges within a radius of 22. from respondent 3-college and further it has been categorically stated that there are three Pre-University colleges runned by private institutions being run with a radius of 5 to 12 kms. They are Hiremath Vidya peeta Pre-University College, Kudligi, Sri Siddalingeshwara Pre-University college, Kanamadagu, Kudligi Taluk and Government Pre-University college at Kudligi. from respondent 3-college and further it has been categorically stated that there are three Pre-University colleges runned by private institutions being run with a radius of 5 to 12 kms. They are Hiremath Vidya peeta Pre-University College, Kudligi, Sri Siddalingeshwara Pre-University college, Kanamadagu, Kudligi Taluk and Government Pre-University college at Kudligi. These alleged students who have taken admission in the respondent 3-College can be shifted to any of the above Colleges without any difficulty to prosecute further studies and also stated that there are sufficient transport facilities available from Chikkajogihalli to Sringeri. Therefore, the students will not be put to any hardship and inconvenience and the government has taken the decision in the interest of the public in general. He also submitted that if the College is continued, the Lecturers cannot be continued as there is no strength. As per the standard norms of the pre-University Board, the minimum strength is, not less than 40 students in each section is a must to continue the Pre-University Course. But in the instant case, the petitioners Counsel has submitted in the course of his submission that 15 students have taken admission to I year Pre-University course and 16 students have taken admission to II year Pre-University course in the respondent 3-College. Therefore, if the College is to be continued, the strength should be at least 40 students as prescribed under the norms of the Pre-University Education. Hence, the Government has taken the said decision in orderto safeguard the interest of the public. If once the policy is taken, the question of interference by the this Court is unjustifiable. Therefore, he submitted that the writ petition filed by the petitioners is liable to be dismissed with cost. ( 6 ) AFTER hearing the learned Counsel for the petitioners, the Government advocate for the respondents, after evaluating the entire material placed on record and after considering the contentions urged by both side Counsels, the only question that arises is, whether the impugned order and the notification issued by the respondents is in accordance with law. ( 7 ) AFTER careful perusal of the impugned order, the notification and the ground urged by the petitioners, the stand taken by the State in the objections, 1 do not find any error of law committed by the respondents in taking the decision. ( 7 ) AFTER careful perusal of the impugned order, the notification and the ground urged by the petitioners, the stand taken by the State in the objections, 1 do not find any error of law committed by the respondents in taking the decision. The Government has taken the said decision after having gone through the ground reality and after taking into consideration the report submitted by the concerned officer deputed, who has given a fact finding report after visiting the college. The learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that only 15 students have taken admission to I year Pre-University course and 16 students have taken admission to II year Pre-University course. Except the said oral statement, there is nothing on record to show that these 15 and 16 students have taken admission in the respondent 3-college. Per contra, it is the stand of the Government in the statement of objections that the allegations made by these petitioners is factual incorrect. He has produced a receipt maintained by the so-called respondent 3-college. Except is one case Kum. M. Sunanda has paid fees and this receipt is neither signed by any official of respondent 3-college nor attested by the Principal. ( 8 ) FURTHER, it is significant to note that as per the Board of Pre-University education, norms for junior colleges, approved by Government in No. ED 29 udc 7, dated 28-4-1971, the minimum requirement for continuance of I year pre-University Course is with a strength of not less than 40 students in each section. In the instant case, as submitted by the learned Counsel for the petitioners that only 15 students have taken admission to I year pre-University Course and 16 students have taken admission to II year pre-University Course, the said submission suffice this Court to hold that there is no ground as such has been made out by the petitioners to quash the impugned order and notification issued by the respondents. The said decision has been taken by the Government after having taking into consideration several factors to safeguard the interest of the public in general and particularly students who do not have facilities to prosecute their further studies. The said decision has been taken by the Government after having taking into consideration several factors to safeguard the interest of the public in general and particularly students who do not have facilities to prosecute their further studies. Further, government has taken decision not only in respect of respondent 3-college but also in respect of other colleges in the State uniformally i. e. , an extent of nine colleges have been shifted and where there is need, the same colleges have been transferred and after taking the decision, the Principal and the staff those who were working under the respondent 3-college have been transferred to different places as early as on 24-7-2003 itself. Therefore, I do not find any force in the submission made by the learned Counsel for the petitioners nor he has made any good ground to interfere with the well-considered order and notification passed by the Government. ( 9 ) IN the facts and circumstances of the case, as stated above, taking into consideration the factual and legal aspects of the matter, I do not find any justification to interfere with the impugned order and notification passed. For the foregoing reasons, writ petition is dismissed. --- *** --- .