JUDGMENT : N. Authinathan, J. Muthaian Muthammal Educational Trust submitted an application to the Southern Regional Committee, which runs a college of Education under the name and style of St.Joseph College of Education, Appicode, Tholayavattam Post, Kanyakumari District [the appellant] to the National Council for Teacher Education [hereinafter referred to as “NCTE”] granted recognition for conducting B.Ed Degree Course by their order dated 17.11.2005. 2. Manonmaniam Sundaranar University granted affiliation to the appellant-college by their order dated 25.06.2007. On 16.05.2008, the NCTE granted conditional recognition for starting M.Ed course for one year duration with an annual intake of 25 students at Appikode campus. In the said letter, it is made clear that the Institution should not make any admission until the unconditional letter of recognition was issued by the Southern Regional Committee, NCTE. 3. The NCTE, Southern Regional Committee by their letter dated 30.08.2008 granted conditional recognition for conducting M.Ed course for one year from the academic session 2008-2009, subject to the following conditions: “1.....; 2..... 3. (III) The institution shall make admission only after it obtains affiliation from the examining body in terms of clause 8(12) of the NCTE (Recognition Norms & Procedure) Regulations, 2007.” The recognition is subject to fulfillment of all such other requirements as may be prescribed by other regulatory bodies like UGC, affiliating University/Body, the State Government etc, as applicable. 4. The appellant claimed that they have submitted an application for affiliation on 25.06.2007 for conducting M.Ed Degree course to Manonmaniam Sundaranar University. The Tamil Nadu Teachers Education University Act, 2008 was enacted to provide for the establishment and incorporation of Teachers Education University in the State of Tamil Nadu for promoting excellence in teachers education. The Act came into force from 01.07.2008. The appellant approached this Court by way of W.P.No.9762 of 2008 seeking a direction to the Manonmaniam Sundaranar University to forward their application dated 25.06.2007 to the affiliating University for considering their application for the M.Ed course. The Act came into force from 01.07.2008. The appellant approached this Court by way of W.P.No.9762 of 2008 seeking a direction to the Manonmaniam Sundaranar University to forward their application dated 25.06.2007 to the affiliating University for considering their application for the M.Ed course. This Court disposed of the Writ Petition with a direction to the fourth respondent University to forward the copy of the application of the appellant dated 25.06.2007 followed by representation dated 16.09.2008 along with connected records to the fifth respondent within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and the fifth respondent in-turn is directed to consider the same and pass appropriate orders within a period of one month thereafter. 5. The fifth respondent University by their letter dated 11.03.2009 informed the appellant that the absence of essential records they are unable to process the appellant's application for the academic year 2008-2009. The fifth respondent University by their letter 06.04.2009 informed that in as much as it has not received the prescribed application form for affiliation for M.Ed Degree Course either from the Manonmaniam Sundaranar University or from the appellant-college, the question of grant of affiliation did not arise and the Demand Drafts were returned. It has reiterated that the candidate admitted arbitrarily without affiliation would not be permitted to appear for the M.Ed Degree Examination May/June 2009. Challenging the letter dated 06.04.2009, W.P. (MD) No. 4255 of 2009 has been filed. 6. Pending disposal of the said Writ Petition, the appellant filed the second Writ Petition in W.P.(MD)No.5731 of 2010, praying for the issuance of a Writ of certiorarified mandamus, calling for the records relating to the impugned proceedings issued by the 5th respondent Tamil Nadu Teacher Education University in No.TNTEU/R/M.Ed Exam fees/CC10923/2010/333 dated 25.03.2010 quash the same and further direct the 5th respondent Tamil Nadu Teacher Education University to permit the 25 students admitted in the appellant-college for the academic session 2009-2010 (names given in the annexure) to take their M.Ed University examinations including the practical examinations (thesis and viva voce) slated to commence on 27.05.2010 or any other future date and publish the results and award degrees. 7. The fifth respondent by their letter dated 25.03.2010 informed that even before grant of affiliation for M.Ed Degree course, the 25 candidates were provisionally admitted in the M.Ed. 7. The fifth respondent by their letter dated 25.03.2010 informed that even before grant of affiliation for M.Ed Degree course, the 25 candidates were provisionally admitted in the M.Ed. Course for the academic year 2009-2010 along with the prescribed examination fees and that therefore they would not be permitted to write the examinations. 8. In M.P.(MD)No.2 of 2010 in W.P.(MD)No.5731 of 2010, this Court by its order dated 21.05.2010 directed the fifth respondent to permit the 25 students, who were admitted for the academic year 2009-2010 to take M.Ed course examination fixed for 25.07.2010. However, the Court restrained the University from publishing the results of the examination until further orders. The learned single has also held that the students, who were admitted for the M.Ed. Degree Course for the year 2009-2010 are not entitled to plead any equity. 9. Subsequently, the appellant has filed Writ Petition in W.P.(MD)No.9051 of 2010 praying for the issuance of a writ of mandamus, directing the 5th respondent Tamil Nadu Teachers Education University to cause inspection forthwith on the petitioner college for the grant of affiliation to the M.Ed Degree course within reasonable time. 10. All the three Writ Petitions were heard together and disposed of by a common order by the learned single Judge. 11. The learned single Judge framed the following points for consideration: a. Whether the petitioner college was correct in admitting students even without waiting for affiliation from the appropriate University" b. Whether the College had forwarded any application in the prescribed form either to the M.S. University or to the Education University? c. Whether the two batch of students who had written examinations pursuant to the order dated 20.05.2009 and 21.05.2010 are eligible for any relief? d. What relief the petitioner college is entitled to get? 12. Placing reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in C.B.S.E. & Anr. Vs. P. Sunil Kumar & Ors. reported in (1998) 5 SCC 377 and in Sunil Oraon [Minor] Through Guardian & Ors. Vs. CBSE & Ors. reported in (2006) 13 SCC 673 and a judgment of Full Bench of this Court in Rukmani College of Education Vs. The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. By its Secretary reported in 2008 (1) MLJ 1217 , the learned single Judge has held that the appellant had not made out any case for grant of relief prayed for by them in W.P. (MD) Nos. The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. By its Secretary reported in 2008 (1) MLJ 1217 , the learned single Judge has held that the appellant had not made out any case for grant of relief prayed for by them in W.P. (MD) Nos. 4255 of 2009 and 5731 of 2010. However, in W.P. (MD) No. 9051 of 2010, the learned single Judge directed the fifth respondent University to consider the application form for affiliation pending with the University or to be later submitted by the appellant to the University for the year 2009-2010 as has been mentioned in the letter dated 06.04.2009 within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. 13. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant would submit that the fifth respondent submitted its application for affiliation from the academic year 2008-2009 but it was not considered even for the next academic year 2009-2010; that the fifth respondent having approved 25 students of the College by its proceedings dated 28.01.2010 and requested the College to remit examination fee, ought to have considered the appellant's application for affiliation from the year 2009-2010. It is also contended that the fifth respondent having allowed the 25 students to write their M.Ed University examinations, ought to have published the results. 14. The learned counsel for the respondents 6 to 14 [students] would submit that if the results are not published, the students would lose their educational career and opportunity of employment also. 15. The learned counsel for the fifth respondent University would submit that in accordance with the directions of this Court the application submitted by the appellant was processed and affiliation was granted for the academic year 2011-2012. He has further submitted that the appellant was not justified in admitting the students to M.Ed course before grant of affiliation by the fifth respondent. 16. It is not in dispute that the appellant admitted the students to M.Ed course for the academic year 2009-2010 before grant of affiliation by the fifth respondent University to it. The Writ Petition in W.P.(MD)No.5731 of 2010 challenging the refusal of affiliation for the academic year 2008- 2009 was dismissed. 16. It is not in dispute that the appellant admitted the students to M.Ed course for the academic year 2009-2010 before grant of affiliation by the fifth respondent University to it. The Writ Petition in W.P.(MD)No.5731 of 2010 challenging the refusal of affiliation for the academic year 2008- 2009 was dismissed. The appellant forwarded the checklist for the 25 candidates provisionally admitted by them for M.Ed Course for the the academic year 2009-2010 with prescribed fees for the eligibility of examination pursuant to a letter sent by the fifth respondent. However, by their letter dated 25.03.2010 the fifth respondent informed the appellant that inadvertently their office had sent the applications bearing serial Numbers 63408 to 63432 relating to M.Ed course, to their College. They have also clearly stated that the appellant ought not to have admitted the students for the year 2009-2010. This letter was sent before the commencement of examinations on 27.05.2010. The Demand Drafts towards examination fees sent by the appellant were also returned. Therefore, the contention of the appellant that the fifth respondent having approved the 25 students of the appellant-college vie proceedings dated 28.01.2010 cannot be countenanced in view of the fact that no affiliation was granted to the appellant-college. 17. It is true that this Court in M.P.(MD)No.2 of 2010 in W.P.(MD) No.5731 of 2010 by its order dated 21.05.2010, pending disposal of the Writ Petition permitted the 25 students to take their M.Ed University examinations commenced on 27.05.2010. However, this interim order is subject to final orders to be passed in the Writ Petition. 18. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in C.B.S.E. & Anr. vs. P. Sunil Kumar & Ors. [ (1998) 5 SCC 377 ] has held that "But to permit students of an unaffiliated institution to appear at the examination conducted by the Board under orders of the Court and then to compel the Board to issue certificates in favour of those who have undertaken examination would tantamount to subversion of law and this Court will not be justified to sustain the orders issued by the High Court on misplaced sympathy in favour of the students." Following the said dictum laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, a Division Bench of this Court in The University of Madras vs. Loordhu Ammal Educational Trust has observed : “In our opinion, respondent no.1 (writ petitioner) was not justified in admitting students to B.Ed. Course, since affiliation has not been granted to it by the Madras University. Admittedly, the degree (B.Ed.), which is sought to be conferred on the students, will be that of the Madras University. Hence until and unless the Madras University grants affiliation to the writ petitioner institution, it had no right at all to admit students which would lead to conferring a degree of Madras University. If admissions are granted, even though the college has not got affiliation, then if ultimately the affiliation is refused, the students will be left in the lurch having wasted lot of time and money.” 19. The ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the Division Bench of this Court will also apply to the facts of the case at hand. The students were permitted to write their M.Ed examinations by the interim order passed by this Court. It is significant to note that this Court has made it clear that the students are not entitled to plead any equity. Viewed in the light of the said decisions, we hold that the appellant-college and the respondents 6 to 14 [students] are not entitled to any relief. We do not find any reason to interfere with the conclusion reached by the learned single Judge. 20. In the result, the Writ Appeal is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.