Kerala High Court Quashes Kannur University's Order Reviewing Ownership Of College, Says Varsity's Power To Review Not Inherent
The Kerala High Court quashed an order passed by Kannur University, which reviewed its own earlier order, and thereafter vested the ownership of Sharaf Arts and Science College Padne with the 'Khidmath Organisation of Padne', which was earlier vested with Sharaf Arts and Science College Committee.Terming the University's order as illegal and without jurisdiction, the high court reiterated that...
The Kerala High Court quashed an order passed by Kannur University, which reviewed its own earlier order, and thereafter vested the ownership of Sharaf Arts and Science College Padne with the 'Khidmath Organisation of Padne', which was earlier vested with Sharaf Arts and Science College Committee.
Terming the University's order as illegal and without jurisdiction, the high court reiterated that a quasi judicial authority's power to review its own order is not inherent and must be specifically granted by the statute under which it operates. Any action of review without such express conferment is an exercise of power without jurisdiction and is void, the court added.
Justice D K Singh, delivered the judgment while dealing with the question whether a statutory authority such as a University can review its own decision in the absence of express statutory authorisation to do so.
The decision was delivered in the dispute concerning the ownership and management of Sharaf Arts and Science College, Padne, which is part of the Kannur University. The petitioner, Sharaf Arts and Science College Committee (hereinafter 'Committee'), registered under the Societies Registration Act in 2006, claimed ownership and management rights to the College.
Initially, a University communication in 2006, identified the Khidmath Organisation as the educational agency, but after inquiries and legal review, the University issued an order in October 2015 officially recognising the petitioner Committee as the rightful educational agency. That decision was subject to multiple rounds of litigation. In July 2024, the University - based on a fresh legal opinion and a syndicate resolution - reversed its 2015 decision and declared Khidmath Organisation to be the educational agency. The petitioner Committee challenged this abrupt reversal as being without jurisdiction.
The high court said:
"It is well-settled law that the statutory body or authority does not have the power of review unless the power is vested by a Statute in the authority to review its earlier order. The University has acted as an appellate forum against the judgment passed by this Court in a number of writ petitions and has reviewed its own order dated 20.10.2015. This Court, as well as the Chancellor in their judgments and orders, have taken the view that unless the issues are decided by the civil court, no interference was called for with the decision of the University recognising the petitioner as an educational agency of the Sharaf Arts and Science College. This Court fails to understand what has changed in between, to take the views as taken in the impugned order, recognising the 6th respondent as the educational agency and owner of the Sharaf Arts and Science College. Nothing has been mentioned by the learned Counsel appearing for the 6th respondent regarding the change of circumstances to take the view as taken by the University in the impugned order. No provision has been pointed out by the Counsel for the University or the 6th respondent that the University has the power to review its own decision under the Kannur University Act and the Statutes made thereunder".
Justice Singh observed that there is no provision in the Kannur University Act and the Statutes made thereunder which gave such power to the University.
The Court relied on Dr Kuntesh Gupta v Management of Hindu Kanya Mahavidyalaya, Sitapur (1980), where the Supreme Court held that a quasi judicial authority cannot review its own order, unless the power of review is expressly conferred on it by the Statute under which it derives its jurisdiction. It also referred to Allahabad High Court's decision in Shivraji v Deputy Director of Consolidation, Allahabad (1997), which underscored that review power must be conferred by statute, not inferred or assumed.
The high court observed that powers of administrative bodies or tribunals are not inherent but are derived solely from the specific statute that creates them.
It said,
“Allowing them to review their own orders without express statutory authorisation would, in essence, grant them powers akin to a higher appellate court, potentially undermining the legislative intent and judicial independence. Unless a statute provides for review, orders passed by quasi-judicial authorities are generally considered final, subject to challenge through appeals or judicial review by higher courts. Allowing self-review without statutory backing would lead to uncertainty and endless litigation”.
It observed that the respondent authority does not have the inherent power to review its decision and such a power can be vested in the authority only by the provisions of law and not otherwise.
"As the University does not have the power under the Act and the Statute made thereunder, the impugned order in Ext.P15 is illegal and without jurisdiction, and the same is set aside," the court said.
Thus, the writ petition was allowed.
Case Title - Sharaf Arts and Science College Committee v State of Kerala and Ors
Citation - 2025 LiveLaw (Ker) 458
Case No - WP(C) 24503/ 2024
Counsel for Petitioner - S Sreekumar (Sr.), P K Ravisankar
Counsel for Respondent - V Venugopal -G P, Suresh Kumar Kodoth, V Pramod, M Saneer, Sukarnan, Kurian George Kannanthanam (Sr.), Tonu George Kannanthanam, P Ravindran (Sr.)