Shikshan Prasarak Mandal vs State of Karnataka and Others

Hanumanthappa, J.-The case of the petitioner is that, it is running 25 educational institutions like High Schools, Junior Colleges, Degree Colleges, in Arts and Science, Polytechnic etc., in different parts of Belgaum District. The petitioner institutions are also running hostels and providing accommodation to the students studying in its institutions and giving scholarships to meritorious students and financial aid to poor and deserving students. Its main object is to uplift the students of the down-trodden specially of the rural area and students belonging to scheduled caste and scheduled tribe.

Further case of the petitioner is, since Raibagh Taluk predominantly consists of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, which in fact, a Reserved Assembly Constituency from here, only a person belonging to Scheduled Castes has to be elected as a member of the Legislative Assembly. Harugeri Village of RaibaghTaluk is a very backward Village so far as Education is concerned. The petitioner''s institution with an intent to impart education to the children of poor and down-trodden, thought of starting a Science College at Harugeri. To comply with the formalities, it submitted an application in the prescribed Form to the Karnataka University seeking permission to start a First Grade College with both Science and Arts for the Academic year 1990-91 at Harugeri Village which is a Mandal Head Quarters of Raibagh Taluk. In this application, it explained that the need to have such a College at Harugeri Village which has got the population of 19000. The petitioner Institution has got a good building on a site of 8 acres constructed at a cost of over 12 lakhs and it has got good play ground, spacious class rooms, a well equipped library, well trained and qualified staff. Further, it is stated in the application the students who pass P.U.C. in the Junior College in Harugeri Village and round about have to go to Chikkodi in order to prosecute their higher studies. Thus, the students of Raibagh Taluk are facing lot of difficulties in prosecuting higher studies.

On receipt of such an application, the University as required under Section 53 of the Karnataka State Universities Act (in short ''the Act'') directed the local enquiry Committee to hold a spot inspection and to submit its report about the need or otherwise of starting a College at Harugeri Village of Raibagh Taluk for the academic year 1990-91. It directed, also to ascertain the bona fides of the petitioner to start such an institution. The Local Inquiry Committee of the University which consisted of several competent Educationists who are working within the jurisdiction of the Karnataka University inspected the place and recommended to accord permission to start a College in Science and Arts at Harugeri Village. Also recommended that the petitioner-Institution has got capacity to run such a College. Thereafter, the matter was placed before the Committee of Academic Council of Karnataka University which turned down the recommendation of Local Inquiry Committee and again the Academic Council of the University concurred with the views of the Committee of Academic Council which ultimately confirmed by the Syndicate. Accordingly, the matter was placed before the University to consider whether the application filed by the petitioner-Institution could be granted or otherwise. The University rejected the request of the petitioner to grant permission to start a College and the same came to be endorsed by the Government at Annexure ''D''.

Hence this Writ Petition.

The grounds of attach of the petitioner are:

(1) the order of the Governmental Annexure-D is not a speaking order.

(2) The views taken by the Committee of Academic Council, Syndicate and ultimately by the University are in contravention of Section 53 of the Act which deals with Affiliation of Colleges;

(3) It is the recommendation of the Local Inquiry Committee which is more important and shall have to be waived more in the minds of the authorities concerned on the committee concerned and not the views of the subsequent Committees;

(4) Neither the University nor the Government took into consideration the earliest report of the Local Inquiry Committee, the basis for such a report was the local inspection made by important Educationists of the University.

When the petitioner established the need of the requirements, its capacity to run a College by maintaining excellence in Education, discipline including imparting education to the children of downtrodden which facility for socio-economic reasons denied for centuries. Since the University and the Government had denied such opportunities to these children by not starting Colleges in Rural areas, now necessity has arisen to start Colleges in rural areas. This act is a consequence to the avowed object of the Constitution, viz., imparting Education, particularly, in rural and backward areas. For these reasons, Sri Guruve Gowda, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the orders under challenge be quashed and a direction be given to the authorities concerned to reconsider the petitioner''s request to grant affiliation to start a Science and Arts College at Harugeri Village of Raibagh Taluk, Belgaum District.

Answer to these contentions, Sri. N.B. Bhat, learned counsel for the third-respondent University submits that, earlier the petitioner filed an application for starting of a new College in Science and Arts and the views of subsequent committees like Committee of Academic Council Academic Council and the Syndicate were against the petitioner in starting a First Grade College at Harugeri Village of Raibagh Taluk, Belgaum District. Finally, the University said that there is no need to start one more college at Harugeri Village. Thus, refused to accord permission which came to be endorsed by the Government.

Sri. Bhat submits that, the need or otherwise is a matter to be considered by the University and not by a person who comes with an application to show that such a need exists.

According to Sri. Bhat, a request for starting a College shall be in confirmity with the ingredients of Section 53 of the Act which are mandatory in nature.

The refusal of according permission to the petitioner to start a First Grade College at Harugeri Village is quite justified and infact a similar stand which the University had taken earlier, in case of All-Ameen Education Society v State of Karnataka (I.L.R. 1989 Kar. 2715) wherein, this Court up-held such a view. According to him, relevant paras of the decision are relevant for the purpose which read as follows:

"Para-17: The rule of interpretation of a provision containing the word may came up for consideration before the Supreme Court in The Official Liquidator v Dharti Dhan (P) Ltd, At para 8, it was observed:

"Where the power is wide enough to cover both an acceptance and a refusal of an application for its exercise, depending upon facts it is directory or discretionary. It is not the conferment of a power which the word "may" indicates that annexes any obligation to its exercise but the legal and factual context of it. This, as we understand it was the principle laid down in the case cited before us. Frederic Guilder Julius v The Right Rev. The Lord Bishop of Oxford: The Rev. Thomas Thellusson Carter, (1880) 5 AC 214."

Again, in para-10, Supreme Court stated the principle, thus:

".... it is always the purpose of the power which has to be examined in order to determine the scope of the discretion conferred upon the donee of the power, if the conditions in which the power is to be exercised in particular cases are also specified by a statute then, on the fulfilment of those conditions, the power conferred becomes annexed with a duty to exercise it in that manner."

The object of the power and its context are the guiding factors to find out the obligatoriness or directive nature of the provision.

Sub-clause (a) to (i) of Section 53(2) requires an applicant to satisfy the Syndicate and the Academic Council regarding certain matters. Section 53(3) requires the applicant to give an assurance regarding the facts stated therein. Section 53(4) requires the Syndicate to direct a local enquiry to be held; it may also hold further inquiry as may appear to it to be necessary. Syndicate''s opinion has to be recorded after consulting the Academic Council. All those proceedings are to be forwarded to the State Government. The State Government is empowered to hold further inquiry, if it appears necessary to do so, before recommending to the University to grant the affiliation or to reject the application for the grant. The University is obliged to make an order in accordance with the recommendations of the Government. If the application is rejected and affiliation is not granted, the ground of such refusal shall be stated in the order of the University.

Para 18: The power to be exercised for the grant or refusal of the application cannot be arbitrary, in the context of the basic right of every individual and group of individuals to have their children educated in the context of the need to have a recognised degree, as a passport to obtain jobs or recognition to be self-employed; again, the right to establish a recognised (affiliated) educational institution, cannot be diluted in such a way, so as to rest it. entirely on the absolute discretion of the State Government. Grant of affiliation is not a bounty to be disbursed, depending upon the convenience of the State Government.

Para 19: The subject of grant of affiliation, here, has been treated by the Legislature, by enacting Section 53 of the Act; the field, thus, is occupied by the legislation. The power to grant or refuse affiliation has become statutory. It can be and has to be exercised in the manner laid down by the Statute, to advance its purposes. The statutory purpose, if any, cannot be subjected to any executive policy, not falling within the statutory scheme. The extreme stand taken by the State Government, that it has an absolute discretion under Section 53 of the Act and the provisions of Section 53 could be overridden by any policy decision, is patently untenable and stramples the doctrine of ultra vires; the attitude that moulded this contention exhibits a tendancy to obstruct and denigrate the rate of law. Executive cannot overstep the limits carved out for it by the Legislature; it shall follow the path laid by the Legislature, in the exercise of its statutory power.

Para 20: The question, then, arises as to the scope of Section 53. Are the provisions of Section 53(2) exhaustive of the factors to be satisfied for the grant of affiliation to a college?

The Legislature cannot foresee the several situations that may crop up in future while entrusting a bower in the State, to deal with an application for affiliation of the college. The factors to be considered, at the outset, are enumerated in Section 53(2). These are the factors, to be satisfied by the applicant. But, independently of these provisions, the Syndicate and the Academic Council are vested with a power under Section 53(4) to direct a local inquiry "in respect of such matters as may be deemed necessary and relevant". (Italic words is by us). If the inquiry to be held under Section 53(4) is confined to the matters stated in Section 53(2), the language of Sec. 53(4) would have been different, by directing the inquiry to be made "in respect of matters stated in Sec. 53(2)." By permitting to hold an inquiry "in respect of such matters as may be deemed necessary and relevant". Legislature has widened the scope of consideration of an application seeking affiliation. With the change of situations and other developments, the Syndicate or the Academic Council of the University may deem it necessary to enlarge the requirements for an affiliation; these other requirements may be of transitory character or would have arisen due to changed conditions in the University area. But these requirements are to be proximate and relevant to the subject of education, as otherwise, the new requirement under Section 53(4) found "necessary and relevant" would be legally necessary and irrelevant.

Para-21: Having regard to the need to have a flexible power, provisions of Section 53(5), which vests a similar power in the State Government also should be liberally construed, so that the scope of inquiry by the State Government need not always be confined to the enumerated factors under Section 53(2). Again, here, the factors to be considered by the State Government while considering the application for affiliation, cannot be irrelevant or too remote to the purposes of establishing a recognised educational institution. Primary object of affiliation is to safeguard excellence in education; normally, this could be achieved by entrusting the power to affiliate or refuse affiliation to the University. But legislature has given a substantial power to the State under Section 53(5). This indicates'' that, apart from the requirement of maintaining excellence in the standard of education, there are other factors which may have to be considered while granting affiliation. One of the purposes of an affiliation, is to enable the students to get degrees which, in turn would enable them to seek employment. Therefore, the number of graduates that may enter the market of employment would be a relevant factor for the Government to consider, while considering an application seeking affiliation. The State has several Universities within its area. Each University by itself will not be in a position to find out the requirements of the State as a whole, for a particular type of graduates. Employment opportunities are to be created by the State; it has the machinery to measure the needs of its society; in fact, the State Government may have regard not only to its requirements and its capacity to provide employment, but also the situation prevailing generally in the Country, as a while. Graduates from one State, may go out of the State seeking employment and the State may gather information as to how far the educational institutions in the State may cater to the needs of other parts of the Country, to some extent.

Para-22: In this context, provisions of Section 53(10)(b) may be noted. No affiliated college can admit students beyond the intake strength fixed by the University or the Government. This is necessary to preserve the excellence in the standard of education: equally, it is necessary to have a ceiling fixed, so that the total output in the State may not exceed the reasonable number of graduates having regard to the various relevant factors, such as job opportunities available to them.

Para-23: Whether, the institution is of a religious or linguistic minority has to be decided with reference to the entire State. In a case where, the University finds that the need of the locality wherein the applicant seeks affiliation is already met by existing educational institutions, it may reject the application; in such a situation, the State may still, step in, while acting under Section 53(5) to safeguard the interest of the minorities with reference to Article 30 of the Constitution. Having regard to the situation in the entire State, the State Government may opine that the particular minority institution may be granted affiliation as an exceptional measure, in spite of the number of institutions having reached the maximum limit. In a particular case, to advance and protect the interest of the particular minority group, the State Government may reduce the intake strength fixed in other educational institutions, if possible, so that, the new entrant to the particular field of education which is a minority institution may be affiliated; however by such affiliation, the total output of graduates may not exceed the limits which the State should produce.

Therefore, having regard to the objects behind the requirement of an affiliation to the University and its effect, the provisions of Sections 53(2), 53(4) and 53(5) are to be read together, so as to vest a wide but guided power in the University and the State Government, while considering an application for affiliation by a college.

Para-24: Section 53, as read it, thus, does not confer an absolute discretion to reject an application for affiliation. Section 53 creates a statutory power. The power has to be exercised by the application of relevant considerations to the subject matter (i.e., education and its objectives) in respect of which the power is exercised. The relevant factors are not confined to the enumerated matters, in Section 53(2).

Similarly, Section 53 does not impose a mandatory duty to grant affiliation, just because, the applicant satisfies the conditions enumerated in Section 53(2). The University and the State have other responsibilities to be discharged to safeguard the public interest, and the Legislature has seen to it by enacting inter alia Sections 53(4), 53(5) and 53(10) of the Act in this regard. An aspect of the above contention requires to be considered here. It was contended that under Section 53(2)(a), need of a locality only is to be considered and the decision of the State Government not to permit new affiliated colleges in the State, is a decision with respect to the entire geographical area of the State, overlooking the needs of any particular locality. The short answer to this contention lies in understanding the State as a conglomeration of localities and when the State considered the question of the need of the State as a whole, the needs of several entities (in the nature of localities) are to be assumed to have been considered. State was held to be conglomeration of "particular areas" in Bhaemankatte Bheemasethu Munivrunds Mutt Swamiji v State of Mysore & Others (1960 Mys.L.J. 576). Concept of a locality varies from context to context; it is a comparative term like the idea of a neighbour, varying, in the context of one house, its neighbour is the one situated next to it or near about; in the context of a State, its neighbours are, the States found across its entire boundaries. The concept of "needs of a ''locality''" may be understood with reference to a town, a taluk, a District or a Division. With reference to a minority, the locality may have a larger area of operation. Further, this concept of "locality" has to be understood in the context of the subject to be taught in the educational institutions concerned. In the case of a primary school, locality to which it catres may be a village, or a part of the village. In the case of an ordinary college (in contradistinction to a college, imparting professional courses), ''locality'' may be a taluk or even a District. A College where professional courses are taught, like, medicine, engineering, law, etc., where the movement of students for studies extend all over the State, ''locality'' may have to be understood as the entire State.

Similarly, we are of the view, that the needs of the minorities are not foreign to the considerations under Section 53(2)(a). Needs of a locality means needs of those who are within the locality. Any ''locality'' has, as its residents, majority, as well as minority groups. Expression used in a law like the Karnataka State Universities Act, has to be understood broadly so that all the relevant considerations may not be ignored, while applying its provisions to a given set of facts."

He submits that already a College is in existence in that area since 1983 and it is not the case of the petitioner that the children belong to poor and down trodden are not admitted in the said college. For these reasons, Mr. Bhat submits that the Writ Petition be dismissed.

After hearing both the sides, I am of the view that this is a case where both the University and the Government went on wrong footing without taking into consideration the need or otherwise and the other factors including the mandatory requirements of Section 53 so also the principles laid down and relied upon by the learned counsel for the University in I.L.R. 1989 Kar. 2715. It is proper if I deal with the scope of Section 53 of the Act, on which, both the University and the Government relied upon to arrive at a conclusion that the request of the petitioner does not deserve to be granted.

Section 53 of the Act clearly envisages that the Colleges within the University Area may, on satisfying the conditions specified in this Section, be affiliated to the University as affiliated colleges by the University on the recommendations made by the State Government.

Sub-Sections of Section 53 read as follows:

(2) A college applying for affiliatio to the University shall send an application to the Registrar within the time limit fixed by Ordinances and shall satisfy the Syndicate and the Academic Council,- (a) that it will supply a need in the locality, having regard to the type of education intended to be provided by the College, the existing provision for the same type of education made by other colleges in the neighbourhood and the suitability of the locality where the College is to be established;

(b) that is to be under the management of a regularly constituted governing body;

(c) that the strength and qualification of the teaching staff and the conditions governing their tenure of office are such as to make due provision for the courses of instruction, teaching or training to be undertaken by the College;

(d) that the buildings in which the college is to be located are suitable and that provision will be made in conformity with the Ordinances for the residence in the college or in lodgings approved by the College, for students not residing with their parents or guardians and for the supervision and welfare of students;

(e) that due provision has been made or will be made for a library;

(f) where affiliation is sought in any branch of experimental science, that arrangements have been or will be made in conformity with the Statutes, Ordinances and Regulations for imparting instruction in the branch of science in a properly equipped laboratory or museum;

(g) that due provision will, as far as circumstances may permit, be made for the residence of the Principle and members of the teaching stiff in or near the college or the place provided working; and (h) that the financial resources of the college are such as to make due provision, for its continued maintenance and efficient working; and (i) that rules fixing the fees (if any) to be paid by the students have been framed or will be framed.

(3) The application shall further contain an assurance that after the college is affiliated, any transference of management and all changes in the teaching stiff and all other changes which result in any of the aforesaid requirements not being fulfilled or continued to be fulfilled shall be forthwith reported to the Syndicate and to the State Government or such authority as the State Government may specify.

(4) On receipt of a letter of application under sub-section (2), the Syndicate shall- (a) direct a local inquiry to be made by a competent person or persons authorised by the Syndicate in this behalf in respect of such matters as may be deemed necessary and relevant;

(b) make such further inquiry as may appear to it be necessary; and c) record its opinion after consulting the Academic Council on the question whether the application should be granted or refused, either in whole or in part, stating the result of any inquiry under clauses (a) and (b).

(5) The Registrar shall (within such time as the Government may from time to time specify) submit application and allproceedings, if any, of the Academic Council and of the Syndicate relating thereto to the State Government which after such inquiry as may appear to it to be neccessay shall make their recommendations for the grant of the application or any part thereof or refuse the application or any part thereof and the University shall issue orders accordingly.

(6) Where the application or any part thereof is granted, the order of the University shall specify the courses of instruction in respect of which and the period for which the college is affiliated, and where the application or any part thereof is refused by the State Government or the University, the grounds of such refusal shall be stated:

(Provided that on the recommendation of the State Government, permanent affiliation may be granted to a College which was affiliated continuously for a period not less than five years and fulfilled all the conditions of affiliation and attained the academic and administrative standards prescribed by the University from time to time).

(7) As soon as possible after the State Government or the University makes its order the Registrar shall submit to the Senate a full report regarding the application, the action taken thereon under sub-sections (4) and (6) and of all proceedings connected therewith.

(8) An application under sub-section (1) may be withdrawn at any time before an order is made under subsection (6).

(9) Where a College desires to add to the courses of instruction in respect of which it is affiliated, the procedure prescribed by sub-sections (2) to (8) shall, so far as may be followed.

(10) (a) No admission of students shall be made by a new college seeking affiliation to any University or by an existing college seeking affiliation to a new course of study to such course, unless, as the case may be, affiliation has been granted to such new college or to the existing college in respect of such course of study.

(b) The maximum number of students to be admitted to a course of study shall not exceed the intake fixed by the University or the Government, as the case may be and any admission made after this section came into force in excess of the intake shall be invalid.

(c) No student whose admission has become invalid under clause (b) shall be eligible to appear nor shall he be presented by the College to appear at any examination conducted by the University.

As per S. 53(4)(a)(b) and (c) of the Act, the Syndicate shall direct a local inquiry to be mads by a competent person or persons authorised by the Syndicate in this behalf in respect of such matters as may be deemed necessary and relevant; make such further inquiry as may appear to it be necessary; and record its opinion after consulting the Academic Council on the question whether the application should be granted or refused, either in whole or in part, stating the result of any inquiry under clauses (a) and (b) and as per Section 53(5) of the Act the Registrar shall submit application and all proceedings, if any, of the Academic Council and of the Syndicate relating thereto to the State Government which after such inquiry as may appear to it to be necessary shall make their recommendations cor the grant of the application or any part thereof or refuse the application or any part thereof and the University shall issue orders accordingly.

As per Section 53(6) of the said Act, in case of refusal, the ground of such refusal shall be stated.

A reading of Section 53(1) to (6), makes it clear that the application after fulfilling all the requirements, shall be forthwith reported to the Syndicate and to the State Government or such authority as the Government may specify and on receipt of a letter of application, the Syndicate shall direct a local inquiry about the need existence or suitability of a college and to give its opinion in regard to seme. The other committees have to look into the matter and in case of any change, they can make the suggestions. Since, the ultimate power is vested with the University either to grant or to refuse affiliation, the views of other inter mediaries on this point are purely of advisory in nature, viz., before according permission or sanctioning of a college, the University may consult these committees. However, while refusing the report submitted by the Local Inquiry Committee, the University has to give grounds of refusal. Before according affiliation, the Government shall have to communicate its views to the University. When the Government chooses to recommend of affiliation, of course, question of giving reasons may not be necessary. But in a case where it feels that the permission sought for by the petitioner to be refused, then, definitely the Government, has to give its reasons. Because, in all such matters, subsequent to affiliation, the Government will definitely have its own influence both in the College and also in the University.

In the instant case, reading of Annexure ''D'' makes it clear that it simply issued an endorsement in two lines to the effect that the Colleges shown at Annexure ''D'', affiliation need not be granted.

Whereas, Sri. N.B. Bhat, learned counsel for the University submits that Annexure ''D'' is not an order in itself. According to him, it is in the nature of communication between the Government and the University. Moreover, there is no obligation on the part of the Government to give reasons for its refusal. As order is yet to be passed by the University, no obligation on the part of the Government to assign reasons. It is premature to contend that it is a final decision taken by the University. Endorsement at Annexure ''D'' has to be followed by an order as contemplated under sub-section (5) of Section 53 of the Act. While passing such an order, the University will assign reasons for its grant or refusal.

However, I am unable to accept the contention of Mr. Bhat, particularly, which relates to the letter Annexure ''D''. As already stated earlier, that any decision taken by the Government, whether it is communicated in the form of an order or a letter, definitely it would bind both the University and the College; If University has so far not taken any decision about the eligibility of the petitioner to start a College at Harugeri Village or otherwise, then there is no reason for the University to compel the petitioner to approach this Court for appropriate relief. Even now, it is left open to the University to take appropriate action on the application submitted by the petitioner seeking affiliation.

The principles laid down by this Court in the decision reported in I.L.R. 1989 Kar. 2715, has no application to the case of the petitioner. In the said decision, the scope of Section 53(2) to (10) has been interpreted. But, nowhere it is saidin the above decision that the decision of the Committee of Academic Council, Academic Council and the decision of the Syndicate will have a binding effect on the recommendation nude by the Local Inquiry Committee. On the other hand, a strict and careful reading is given to all the paras, as extracted above which Mr. Bhat has relied upon, infact, are in favour of the petitioner. This Court has laid stress on the point that the authorities while exercising powers conferred under Section 53 of the Apt shall exercise such powers not arbitrarily but keeping in mind the imparting of Education to the children as otherwise opportunity to obtain job or recognition to self-employment will be deprived of. At para 18 of the said decision. Their Lordships have made it clear the right to establish a recognised (affiliated) educational institution, cannot be diluted in such a way, so as to rest it entirely on the absolute discretion of the State Government. Grant of affiliation is not a bounty to be disbursed depending upon the convenience of the State Government. In para 19, it is stated that, the power to grant or refuse affiliation has become statutory. It can be and has to be exercised in the manner laid down by the Statute, to advance its purposes. The statutory purpose, if any, cannot be subjected to any executive policy, not'' falling within the statutory scheme. In para 21, it is stated that the scope of inquiry by the State Government need not always be confined to the enumerated factors under Section 53(2). Primary object of affiliation is to safeguard excellence in education.

Therefore, one of the purposes of an affiliation, is to enable the students to get degrees which, in turn would enable them to seek employment. Therefore, the number of graduates that may enter the market of employment would be a relevant factor for the Government to consider, while considering an application seeking affiliation.

No doubt, Mr. Bhat submits that already a Pre-University College is in existence in Harugeri Village and as such, there is no need to open another college at Harugeri Village. According to him, the population of the said Village is hardly 16000 whereas Mr. Guruvegowda, learned counsel for the petitioner says the population of the said Village is 19000.

Of course, there is a difference of opinion, in the total strength of the population of the town. But the reasons given by the petitioner in paras 2 to 4 of the petition are, need to start a College at Harugeri Village not only to cater to the needs of the students of that village but to cater to the needs of students of other surrounding villages. If the authorities had taken into consideration this factor, definitely their conclusion would have been different, namely that need to start a College exists. It is not the population alone which is required for determination to decide the existence to start a College or otherwise. It is the availability of students which determines the need. At places like Bangalore, Mysore, Hubli, Belgaum and other cities, affiliations have been granted to several persons and institutions to start colleges side by side. When that is so, one fails to understand that why similar yardstick cannot be applied in case of towns and semi-urban places where there is urge for higher education and desire to get degrees, so that, they can improve their living conditions by seeking employment as their brethern in cities as stated by the learned counsel.

Though Annexure-D is in the form of letter, still it is to be said it is the resultant of non-application of mind on the part of the Government in arriving at a conclusion about non-existence of need to start one more college by the petitioner at Harugeri Village. When it is held that the decision taken subsequent to the Local Inquiry Committee including the Government is arbitrary and in direct contravention of mandatory requirements of Section 53 and the principles laid down by this Court in I.L.R. 1989 Kar. 2715, without hasitation it has to be said that any decisions taken by the University and the Government not in confirmity with the decision of the Local Inquiry Committee shall also be arbitrary and illegal. Since the decisions of the University and Government are arbitrary, the relief sought by the petitioners deserves to be granted.

Accordingly, this petition is allowed directing the University to consider the petitioner''s request for affiliation to start First Grade College at Harugeri taking its independent opinion on the material made available including the first and the earliest report of the Local Inquiry Committee in the light of the observations made above and to dispose of the same within three months from the date of receipt of this order.

Annexure ''D'' shall stand quashed in so far it relates to the case of the petitioner.

There is no order as to costs.

Let a carbon copy of this order be made available to Sri. Bhat, learned counsel for the University, so that, he could contact his client.

Shri N.B. Bhat, learned counsel for the University, who took notice for University on my direction, was heard in the matter.

He is permitted to file Vakalath within four weeks.

Writ petition allowed.