University's Wisdom To Prescribe Minimum Standards Of Education Cannot Be Questioned In Writ Petition: Kerala High Court
The Kerala High Court recently held that a University's decision to prescribe minimum standards to increase the quality of education in the colleges cannot be questioned in a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
Justice N. Nagaresh was considering a writ petition preferred by a college under the Kerala University of Health Sciences. The college had intended to introduce various para-medical courses and though NOC was issued by the government, the University rejected the application.
The bench observed: "From Clause 2(5)(ii)(v) and Ext.R2(a) and Ext.P8, it has to be held that the University, with intent to maintain high degree of educational standards, intended to insist for minimum percentage of pass in all courses conducted by the Colleges/Institutions for grant of enhancement of seats in an existing course. The wisdom of the University to prescribe minimum standards in education cannot be called in question in a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India."
The application was rejected by the University stating that the pass percentages of all regular examinations of the existing batches in the college is only 44.15%, lower than the minimum 50% prescribed in Exhibit P7 notification.
Exhibit P7, under Clause 2(5)(ii)(v) mandates that colleges have to satisfy two conditions for starting new courses or enhancing seats. The conditions are: (i) the first batch of the courses in the college of the same stream has to pass out, and (ii) a declaration must be submitted stating that the pass percentage of previous regular examinations of all existing batches of the same course at the time of application is not below the minimum prescribed by the Governing Council in Exhibit P1.
Exhibit R2(a) made additional clarifications to the clause and the same was ratified by Exhibit R2(b). Vide Exhibit P8 , the Governing Council also added two new sub-clauses.
The Court opined that there was a confusion with respect to the implication of Clause 2(5)(ii)(v) since it prescribes common procedural requirements for affiliation of new colleges, new courses and enhancement of seats for various courses. Interpreting the word "stream", the Court observed:
"The word “stream” cannot be interpreted to mean other totally different courses run by the institution. The words “pass percentage of previous regular examinations of all existing batches of the same course” means all existing batches of the particular course only...For instance, Clause 2(5)(ii)(v) requires the Colleges which apply for affiliation of a new course to furnish details of the average pass percentage of previous regular examinations of all existing batches of the same course. It is impossible to furnish details of pass percentage of previous examination of same course as the course is yet to be introduced. In such situation, this Court is bound to give a purposive interpretation to the provision taking note of the object of the Act/Statute."
Looking at Exhibit R2(a), the Court observed that the average of pass percentage required should be of all regular examinations of the existing batches of all courses under the same stream.
Thus, the Court dismissed the writ petition.
Case No: WP(C) No. 20249 of 2025
Case Title: The Principal, Dr. Somervell Memorial CSI Medical College v. State of Kerala and Ors.
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 585
Counsel for the petitioner: Arun B. Varghese, Rakhi Raj, Alan Lalu John, S. Sreekumar (Sr.)
Counsel for the respondents: Binny Thomas, P. Sreekumar (Sr.), Anima M. - Government Pleader