University Can't Assume Role Of College Principal For Cancelling Student's Admission Due To Lack Of Attendance: Kerala High Court

The Division Bench comprising Justice A Muhamed Mustaque and Justice Shoba Annamma Eapen observed thus:

“As observed earlier, the University's role in private College is to the limited extent to ensure that University regulations are followed or not. The University cannot assume the role of Principal and direct the College Principal to act on their direction. Absolutely there is no merit in this writ appeal.”

Background

A writ petition was moved by a student against the order issued by the Principal of the SEEDAC College of Arts and Science, Palakkad cancelling his admission to BA (Economics). The SEEDAC College of Arts and Science was affiliated to the Calicut University. The Vice Chancellor of the Calicut University had directed the Principal to cancel his admission on the allegation that he did not attend regular classes and was working as a project assistant with a salary in a Grama Panchayat.

The writ petition was disposed of by quashing the order cancelling his admission on the finding that he had attended online classes and that similarly placed other students were continuing in the college. The appellant-University of Calicut has approached the High Court by way of a writ appeal challenging the order of the single judge.

Court Findings

The Court stated that it was dismayed at the action taken by Calicut University in directing the Principal to cancel the admission of the student and remove his name from the rolls. It stated that the SEEDAC College of Arts and Science was a self-financing college affiliated with Calicut University. It said, “ The self-financing College has authority to maintain discipline in its own College in regard to the attendance of the college”.

The Court stated that the College was bound by the regulations based on the affiliation and as per Calicut University CBCS Regulation, a student cannot be absent continuously for a period of fourteen days without sufficient reason and giving proper intimation to the Principal. It stated that in such situations, the college could take action. It also stated that if a student does not have sufficient attendance within the condonable limits, the University can refuse his registration for exams. However, the Court stated, “In all these circumstances, the role of the University is only of a supervisory nature, as the authority to determine the factum of absence from classes is with the Principal of the College.”

In the facts of the case, the Court said that the student has attended online classes and that the College Principal also do not have a case that the student did not attend classes. It thus held, “The Principal cannot surrender his freedom to take action against a student, to the University.”

The Court further stated that if a college conducts online classes without permission, action should have been taken against the college and not against the student who attended those online classes.

The Court thus stated that the University should not have ordered the cancellation of the admission of the student since it was a matter that was under the ambit of the college Principal. It said, “At the best, the University could only have ordered through the Principal as to the actual attendance of the student and to report to the University.”

As such, the writ appeal was dismissed.

Counsel for appellant: Advocate P C Sasidharan

Counsel for respondents: Senior Advocate P Ravindran, Advocates P E Sajal, K Manoj Chandran

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Ker) 203

Case title: University of Calicut v Ameen Rashid K P

Case number: WA NO. 50 OF 2024

Click Here To Read/Download The Judgment