ORDER : Does the interpretation given by a Division Bench of this Court in the judgment in W.A.No.1864/2018 (Ext.P13) that an Associate Member of the Institute of Engineering (AMIE) cannot aspire for admission to M.Tech course without a valid GATE score, suffer from any infirmity, is the controversy that needs to be answered in this reference. The clauses of the prospectus which were interpreted to arrive at the aforesaid conclusion, are identical to the clauses in the prospectus (Ext.P7) involved in the case on hand. The parties and the documents will be referred to as described in W.P.(C) No.10430/2019. 2. The relevant clauses of Ext.P7 prospectus issued by the third respondent, namely, the APJ Abdul Kalam Technological University for admission to the post graduate degree course for engineering reads thus- “V. Eligibility for admission (a) The candidates shall be an Indian National. (b) The candidates should have studied the Graduate course in an institution approved by the AICTE / Deemed Universities in India. (c) Candidates should have a minimum of 60% aggregate marks in the Engineering Degree examination. For SC/ST candidates a pass in the Engineering Degree course is sufficient. For SEBC (OBC) students, a minimum of 54% aggregate marks in the Engineering Degree examination is mandatory. (d) Candidates, who have passed AMIE / AMIETE Examinations and satisfying the following conditions, are eligible for admission. (1) They must have valid GATE score. (2) A minimum of 55% marks for section B in AMIE/AMIETE examination. (e) Candidates who have appeared for the final semester examination can also apply, provided he/she has passed all the subjects up to and including the 6th semester exam (8th semester for B. Arch students). Confirmation of admission of such candidates shall be subject to the production of qualifying degree-before the date stipulated by the affiliated University. (f) Admission shall normally be restricted to those with valid GATE score. However, this stipulation is relaxed in the case of Sponsored candidates. (g) In case seats remain vacant due to lack of candidates with valid GATE score, candidates from Kerala State without valid GATE score will be considered against such vacancies. If seats are still remaining vacant, candidates from other states will be considered for admission. VIII. Selection of Candidates 1. For Institutions in Annexure A and Annexure B (a) Candidates will have to register their option while submitting the application. If seats are still remaining vacant, candidates from other states will be considered for admission. VIII. Selection of Candidates 1. For Institutions in Annexure A and Annexure B (a) Candidates will have to register their option while submitting the application. (b) The selection of Candidates will be supervised by the selection committee consisting of the Director of Technical Education (Chairman), the Senior Joint Director (ECS) and the principal. College of Engineering, Thiruvananthapuram. The Principal, College of Engineering, Thiruvananthapuram will be the co-ordinator and venue of admission work is College of Engineering Thiruvananthapuram. (c) Selection of candidates will be based on the GATE score. In case of tie, advantage will be given to the candidates who secure highest aggregate marks up to 6th semester in their qualifying examination (8th semester for B. Arch students). (d) If sufficient GATE qualified candidates are not available, the selection will be made from Keralite candidates based on the aggregate marks up to 6th semester in their qualifying examination (8th semester for B.Arch. students). Candidates who produce Nativity Certificate in original obtained as per Annexure-C, at the time of admission will only be admitted in this case. A Rank List will be published based on the GATE Score/Percentage of marks. Candidates are requested to verify their branch/Marks/Category etc. at the time of publishing draft Rank List. After finalizing the Rank List, any alternation on those factors will not be entertained under any Circumstances. (e) xxx xxx xxx (f) xxx xxx xxx (g) xxx xxx xxx (h) xxx xxx xxx (i) xxx xxx xxx (j) xxx xxx xxx” (Emphasis supplied) 3. Before we proceed to answer the controversy, a brief narration of facts in the referred writ petitions is necessary. Rajasree S., the petitioner, in W.P.(C)No.10430/2019, holder of Diploma in Electronics Engineering (3 year course) and pass in Sections 'A' and 'B' examinations of AMIE in the branch of Electronics and Communications and working as Demonstrator in N.S.S. Polytechnic College, Pandalam, applied for admission to M.Tech in Engineering in the fifth respondent Engineering College relying on Clauses V(a), (b) and (d) read with the exemption/relaxation clauses provided in Clauses V(f) and (g) of Ext.P7 prospectus. The petitioner secured admission in the fifth respondent College pursuant to which she successfully completed the first semester. The petitioner secured admission in the fifth respondent College pursuant to which she successfully completed the first semester. However, after the commencement of classes for the second semester, the fourth respondent, that is, the Admission Supervisory Committee (ASC) issued Ext.P11 order dated 31/01/2019 withholding approval of admission of the petitioner on the ground that being an AMIE certificate holder, the petitioner is to produce valid GATE score card. This direction was given based on Ext.P13 judgment dated 22/01/2019. 3.1. According to the petitioner herein, there was no challenge and hence no adjudication in Ext.P13 case on the question of unreasonable classification of candidates possessing equivalent qualifications in the matter of getting admission to the seats lying vacant for want of candidates with valid GATE score. The relief sought was to direct the ASC not to insist on the production of GATE score card of the petitioner therein, also an AMIE certificate holder, as there was no such requirement in the prospectus and hence the ASC had no authority to insist for the same. The clauses in Ext.P7 prospectus stipulating eligibility for admission makes an unreasonable classification of candidates possessing equivalent qualifications, that too, in respect of giving exemption/relaxation from having valid GATE score card for filling up the seats lying vacant for want of candidates with valid GATE score card. Such a classification is irrational, arbitrary, unreasonable and without any rational nexus to the purpose for which such classification is made. Hence the writ, seeking inter alia quashing of Clause V(d) of Ext.P7 prospectus to the extent it makes an unreasonable classification among B. Tech and AMIE qualified candidates, as it is unreasonable, irrational, arbitrary and offending Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India. 4. Ebin Tom, the petitioner, in W.P.(C) No.12433/2019 had earlier filed W.P(C) No.26850/2017 raising similar issues. The said petition was dismissed as per judgment dated 26/02/2018. This judgment has been confirmed by a Division Bench of this Court in Ext.P13 judgment. The petitioner in W.P.(C) No.10430/2019 by an interim order was permitted to continue her course at her own risk subject to the result of the writ petition. The Division Bench also allowed her to write the examinations and the result to be published. It was in this background, Ebin Tom filed W.P. (C)No.12433/2019 seeking a similar order. 5. The petitioner in W.P.(C) No.10430/2019 by an interim order was permitted to continue her course at her own risk subject to the result of the writ petition. The Division Bench also allowed her to write the examinations and the result to be published. It was in this background, Ebin Tom filed W.P. (C)No.12433/2019 seeking a similar order. 5. When the aforesaid writ petitions were taken up for hearing, a Division Bench of this Court doubted the correctness of Ext.P13 judgment and hence the Reference. Sri. Ebin Tom, the petitioner in W.P.(C) No.26850/2017, an AMIE qualified candidate obtained admission for M.Tech in the 3rd respondent college, namely, Amal Jyothi College of Engineering. He was faced with the same situation as faced by the petitioner in W.P.(C) No.10430/2019. In W.P.(C) No.26850/2017, on a consideration of the various sub-clauses to Clause V in the prospectus, the learned single Judge concluded that persons who had passed AMIE/AMIETE examinations form a class of their own and hence could not be included in the general prescription or exemption granted in Clause V(g) and accordingly dismissed the writ petition. 5.1. Aggrieved, Ebin Tom preferred W.A.No.1864/2018 in which the Division Bench in Ext.P13 held thus - “7. Assailing the legality of the impugned judgment, the learned Senior Counsel Sri. Kurian George Kannanthanam would refer to the notification dated 16.1.2006 (Ext.P1) of the Ministry of Human Resource Development to point out that AMIE qualification obtained through distance mode from the Institution of Engineers (India), is declared to be equivalent to a B. Tech degree in Engineering from recognised Universities in India. He also refers to the communication dated 14.10.2013 (Ext.P2) of the University Grants Commission which also provides that the degree awarded by the Open and Distance Learning Institutions should be treated as equivalent, to the corresponding award of degree of the traditional Universities. Placing heavy reliance on the Exts.P1 and P2 communications, the counsel would argue that such equivalence declaration should be extended for the purpose of securing admission to Post Graduate curriculum by those, with AMIE qualification. 8. In the context of the above argument, the first thing that strikes us is that Exts.P1 and P2 do not speak of equivalence of the degrees, for the purpose of Post Graduate admission. 8. In the context of the above argument, the first thing that strikes us is that Exts.P1 and P2 do not speak of equivalence of the degrees, for the purpose of Post Graduate admission. Moreover in the absence of any challenge to the Ext.P4 prospectus, which prescribes the eligibility norms for Post Graduate admission under which the petitioner is clearly ineligible, it will be difficult for us to interpret the Exts.P1 and P2 equivalence declaration, in the manner suggested by the appellant's counsel. This is because the aggrieved party has made no challenge to the provisions of the prospectus on the ground that they are against the Exts.P1 and 2 prescription. 9. A reading of the Ext.P4 prospectus and the eligibility criteria prescribed therein under Clause V clearly suggest that the candidates having a Graduate Engineering Degree from an institution approved by the AICTE or deemed University in India are eligible for M. Tech admission, even without GATE score. Additionally, those Engineering degree holders with valid GATE score are entitled to preferential ranking in the rank list, prepared for the eligible candidates. But for the candidates having AMIE/AMIETE qualification, a valid GATE score is a mandatory eligibility criteria and they must satisfy the requirement in the Clause (d) so as to merit inclusion in the rank list of the candidates to be admitted. It is also relevant to note herein that Sub-clauses (f) and (g) of Clause V deal with situation, where normally those in possession of valid GATE score, can only be considered for admission. The GATE score is optional for those holding B. Tech degree, to determine eligibility for Post Graduate admission. These Sub clauses in our understanding can apply only for those candidates with a regular engineering degree, for whom the GATE score is optional. Consequently it would not apply to those with AMIE qualification where GATE score is a mandatory requirement, under Clause V(d) of the Ext.P4 prospectus. 10. In the above circumstances, the decision taken by the learned Judge to dismiss the Writ Petition on the ground that the aspirant with AMIE qualification without GATE score, were ineligible under the Ext.P4 prospectus to secure admission into the M. Tech curriculum, would not justify our intervention.” 6. 10. In the above circumstances, the decision taken by the learned Judge to dismiss the Writ Petition on the ground that the aspirant with AMIE qualification without GATE score, were ineligible under the Ext.P4 prospectus to secure admission into the M. Tech curriculum, would not justify our intervention.” 6. At the outset, it is necessary to mention that the expression “Eligibility for admission” which is the title of Clause V, has to be understood as 'fit and proper to be chosen for admission' or 'qualified to be selected for admission' [See Black's Law Dictionary, 6th Edition, Pg.521). As Clause V contains different sub-clauses, the same have to be interpreted harmoniously. As evident from Clause V, sub-clause (c) dealing with the eligibility criteria of candidates who have passed Engineering Degree Examination, does not stipulate that they must have valid GATE score in order to become eligible for admission. Whereas, sub-clause (d) dealing with eligibility criteria of candidates who have passed AMIE/AMIETE Examinations stipulates that they must have valid GATE score in order to become eligible for admission. Sub-clause (f) though does not deal with eligibility criteria for seeking admission, it provides that admission shall normally be restricted to those with valid GATE score. Of course, it is clarified in the said sub-clause itself that the stipulation therein is relaxed in the case of Sponsored candidates. Sub-clause (g) is a provision intended to deal with a contingency, namely, where seats remain vacant due to lack of candidates with valid GATE score. It provides that in such a situation, candidates from Kerala State without a valid GATE score will be considered for admission against such vacancies. According to the petitioners in the referred writ petitions, relaxation of the requirement to have valid GATE score as contained in sub-clauses (f) and (g) is available to candidates who have passed Engineering Degree Examination as also AMIE/AMIETE Examination. Whereas the stand taken by the Admission Supervisory Committee (ASC) is that the relaxation of the requirement to have valid GATE score as contained in sub-clauses (f) and (g) is available only to those candidates who have passed Engineering Degree Examination. 7. Whereas the stand taken by the Admission Supervisory Committee (ASC) is that the relaxation of the requirement to have valid GATE score as contained in sub-clauses (f) and (g) is available only to those candidates who have passed Engineering Degree Examination. 7. A perusal of the reference order indicates that the learned Judges of the Division Bench were of the view that there is no distinction provided in sub-clauses (f) and (g) between the candidates who have passed Engineering Degree Examination and AMIE/AMIETE Examinations and as such, the said sub-clauses should apply to both categories of candidates. It is in this background that the question formulated for decision arises for consideration. 8. As seen from Clause V, sub-clauses (a) to (e) deal with the eligibility criteria for seeking admission to M. Tech Course and sub-clauses (f) and (g) deal with relaxation from the requirement to have a valid GATE score. In sub-clause (f), before providing for relaxation in favour of Sponsored candidates, it is stipulated that admission shall normally be restricted to those with valid GATE score. The relaxation provided in sub-clause (f) is therefore relaxation from the stipulation made therein that admission shall normally be restricted to those with valid GATE score. It is due to this reason that the candidates are required to produce along with their application, the valid GATE score card. In other words, sub-clause (f) is a clause dealing with the relaxation from the admission criteria. A clause dealing with relaxation of admission criteria can be availed of only by eligible candidates. Likewise, sub-clause (g) also is a sub-clause dealing with relaxation from the admission criteria fixed and not eligibility criteria, as it is a provision to manage the contingency as regards seats remaining vacant due to lack of candidates with valid GATE score. Needless to say, the relaxations provided for in sub-clauses (f) and (g) are not relaxations from the eligibility criteria, but only relaxations for claiming admission after complying with the eligibility criteria which in terms of sub-clause (f), is restricted to those candidates with valid GATE score. It appears to us that it is on account of the said reason that the word 'normally' is used in sub-clause (f). It appears to us that it is on account of the said reason that the word 'normally' is used in sub-clause (f). If the interpretation as canvassed for by the petitioners and as endorsed by the Division Bench which referred the matter, is accepted, in the case of candidates who have passed AMIE/AMIETE Examinations and aspiring to seek admission under sub-clause (g), the terms of the prospectus would appear to be one enabling them to apply for admission, expecting the contingency of seats remaining vacant, even when they are not eligible to the considered for admission if the contingency does not arise. If that were to be the intention of the makers of the prospectus, there would not have been any reason at all to prescribe the eligibility conditions in sub clauses (c) and (d), differently. 9. In Ext.P13, the vires of the Clauses in the prospectus therein, which are identical to the Clauses in Ext.P7 was not under challenge and hence the same was never considered by either the learned single Judge or by the Division Bench. The learned single Judge and the Division Bench only interpreted the relevant Clauses in the prospectus, which interpretation has been doubted in the reference order. Therefore, we have confined our findings to the same only and have not gone into the challenge and arguments advanced by the petitioner assailing the vires of Clause V(g) in Ext.P7 as being violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India, as adjudicating on the same would be beyond the scope of the reference. 10. We answer the reference thus - The Division Bench judgment in Ext.P13, that is, W.A.No.1864/2018, has rightly interpreted the relevant Clauses in the prospectus as per which AMIE/AMIETE candidates must have a valid GATE score for securing admission to M.Tech. The exemption from GATE score granted is available only to Engineering Degree candidates. The writ petitions shall be placed before the Bench concerned as per roster.