P. Vijayakumar and Others vs Kakatiya Institute of Technology and Sciences and Another

These two writ petitioners raise identical questions and are taken up together and disposed of by a common order.

The petitioners are the students of respondent No. 1, Kakatiya Institute of Technology and Sciences, Warangal, which is affiliated to respondent No. 2 University. The challenge in these writ petitions is Regulation-10 issued by the 1st respondent-Institution stipulating conditions for promotion to the next higher semester in B.Tech. Course. Regulation-10 reads as follows :

"10.0 : Condition for promotion :

A candidate will have to satisfy the attendance requirements for the years/semester for promotion to the next higher semester in addition.

10.1 : For promotion to the 1st Semester of III year, a candidate must have passed all but four courses prescribed for the I year.

10.2 : For promotion to the 1st Semester of IV year a candidate must have passed all but four (4) courses prescribed for the 1 year and 1st and 2nd semesters of II year taken together."

The grievance raised by the petitioners is that the Andhra University, Sri Venkateswara University and Srikirshna Devaraya University do not stipulate any condition for promotion to the next year and that the Regional Engineering College, Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University and Osmania University stipulate that one can have 8, 9 and 15 backlogs respectively for getting promotion to the next academic year and that the Regulation framed by the Kakatiya University is discriminatory inasmuch as the other Universities in the State do not stipulate any condition for promotion to the next academic year.

Counter-affidavit has been filed by the respondents-University stating that the submission of the petitioners is not correct inasmuch as the Osmania University has a prescription for backlogs, which had been challenged in this Court by way of a writ petition, wherein a learned single Judge of this Court had passed an interim order permitting the students to continue their courses in the higher semester, but, however in W.A. No. 1090 of 1996 the interim order was set aside on 19-9-1996. So far as Sri Venkateswara University is concerned the conditions in its Regulations for clearing backlogs for promotion were challenged in W.P. No. 17481 of 1996, but by judgment delivered on 9-10-1996 the case was disposed of holding that the question raised cannot be the subject matter for decision under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Mr. T. S. Harinath, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent-University submits that the judgment in W.P. No. 17481 of 1996 has become final.

It is well settled that in academic matters of a University, this Court would not readily intervene under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to interfere with the administration by the Universities of academic or internal matters as they intrinsically possess the necessary expertise to regulate their own matters. The Universities are statutory autonomous bodies and are best suited to prescribe the conditions as to how a student can be promoted to the next higher course. Unless there is legislation requiring all Universities to follow the uniform standards in the matter of backlogs, such uniformity of standards cannot be imposed by the judicial determination. Merely because the petitioners were allotted through the common entrance examination to the respondents-Universities, they cannot claim that the respondent-University must be compelled to follow the uniform procedure of another University.

We do not find any merit in the writ petitions. The writ petitions are dismissed.