Access over 20 million homework & study documents

The University of Madras V. Shantha Bai and Anr, AIR 1954 Mad 67

Content type
User Generated
Type
Study Guide
Rating
Showing Page:
1/14
1. The University of Madras V. Shantha Bai and Anr, AIR 1954 Mad 67
Hon'ble Judges- Rajamannar, C.J. and Venkatarama Ayyar, J
Facts:
In 1949 a new college called the Mahatma Gandhi Memorial College was founded in the
town of Udipi and affiliated to the University of Madras. While granting affiliation, the
Syndicate gave permission for the admission of only 10 girl students in the Junior
Intermediate class as a temporary measure for that year and directed that in future no women
students should be admitted without the special sanction of the syndicate. On 24-7-1951, the
petitioner Shantha Bai applied for admission to the Intermediate course in this college, but
her application was refused by the Principal on the ground that girl students would not be
admitted, there upon, she filed the petition. In appeal she raised for the issue of a writ of
mandamus against the Principal of the College to admit her to the Intermediate course. The
first respondent to this application was the University of Madras and the second, the Principal
of the college. The affidavit in support of the petition stated that the second respondent had
refused to admit the petitioner as a result of the directions given by the first respondent not to
admit women into the college; that those directions were opposed to Section 5(1) of the
Madras University Act, 7 of 1923 and that they were also repugnant to Article 15(1) of the
Constitution, in that they discriminated against the applicant on the ground of sex and
therefore void. On these allegations it was prayed that a writ of mandamus be issued directing
the second respondent to admit the petitioner in the college
Contentions:
(1) Article 15 (1) prohibits discrimination only by the State; the University of Madras is not a
State and its directions are therefore unaffected by the operation of Article 15 (1).
(2) The right of a citizen to get admission into an educational institution is governed not by
Article 15 (1), but by Article 29 and that article does not prohibit any restriction based on the
ground of sex.
(3) The directions given by the University do not deny the right of women to be admitted into
colleges, but only regulates the exercise of that right and that having regard to the nature of
the right, the restrictions are reasonable and not discriminatory.
Primarily, we will discuss this case as to find answer to the question, whether the University
can be held to be "local or other authority" as defined in Article 12.
Pleadings:
(1) On behalf of the University it was contended that it could not be included as persons
Natural or Juristic who cannot be regarded as Instrumentalities of the Government. The
University of Madras is a body corporate created by Madras Act VII of 1923. It is not
charged with the execution of any Governmental functions; its purpose is purely to promote
education. Though Section 44 of the Act provides for financial contribution by the local

Sign up to view the full document!

lock_open Sign Up
Showing Page:
2/14
Government, the University is authorized to raise its own funds of income from fees,
endowments and the like. It is a State-aided institution, but it is not maintained by the State.
(3) A direction given by the University that the colleges affiliated to it should provide certain
facilities for women before they can be admitted cannot be said to be discriminatory on the
ground of sex and therefore, it is not void, and that the American decisions which decided
that exclusion of Negroes from educational institutions is opposed to the 14th Amendment do
not bear on the point. In fact, there was no regulation refusing admission to women students.
The regulations were only addressed to the colleges which refused permission to admit
women when they do not provide sufficient facilities.
Judgement
The State is defined in Article 12 as including "The Government and Parliament of
India and the Government and the Legislature of each of the state and all local or other
authorities within the territory of India or under the control of, the Government of
India." The question is whether the University can be held to be "local or other
authority" as defined in Article 12. These words must be construed 'ejusdem generis'
with Government or Legislature and so construed can only mean authorities exercising
governmental functions. They would not include persons natural or Juristic who cannot
be regarded as Instrumentalities of the Government. The University of Madras is a
body corporate created by Madras Act VII of 1923. It is not charged with the execution
of any Governmental functions; its purpose is purely to promote education. Though
Section 44 of the Act provides for financial contribution by the local Government, the
University is authorised to raise its own funds of income from fees, endowments and the
like. It is a State-aided institution, but it is not maintained by the State.
The Court concluded that the University of Madras is not a state as defined in Article
12 of the Constitution and that its regulations are not subject to the prohibition enacted
in Article 15(1); that admission to colleges is regulated by Article 29(2) and that the
regulations of the University requiring that colleges should provide certain facilities for
women before they could be admitted are not discriminatory on the ground of sex. And
the appeal was allowed.

Sign up to view the full document!

lock_open Sign Up
Showing Page:
3/14

Sign up to view the full document!

lock_open Sign Up
End of Preview - Want to read all 14 pages?
Access Now
Unformatted Attachment Preview
1. The University of Madras V. Shantha Bai and Anr, AIR 1954 Mad 67 Hon'ble Judges- Rajamannar, C.J. and Venkatarama Ayyar, J Facts: In 1949 a new college called the Mahatma Gandhi Memorial College was founded in the town of Udipi and affiliated to the University of Madras. While granting affiliation, the Syndicate gave permission for the admission of only 10 girl students in the Junior Intermediate class as a temporary measure for that year and directed that in future no women students should be admitted without the special sanction of the syndicate. On 24-7-1951, the petitioner Shantha Bai applied for admission to the Intermediate course in this college, but her application was refused by the Principal on the ground that girl students would not be admitted, there upon, she filed the petition. In appeal she raised for the issue of a writ of mandamus against the Principal of the College to admit her to the Intermediate course. The first respondent to this application was the University of Madras and the second, the Principal of the college. The affidavit in support of the petition stated that the second respondent had refused to admit the petitioner as a result of the directions given by the first respondent not to admit women into the college; that those directions were opposed to Section 5(1) of the Madras University Act, 7 of 1923 and that they were also repugnant to Article 15(1) of the Constitution, in that they discriminated against the applicant on the ground of se ...
Purchase document to see full attachment
User generated content is uploaded by users for the purposes of learning and should be used following Studypool's honor code & terms of service.

Anonymous
Just what I needed…Fantastic!

Studypool
4.7
Trustpilot
4.5
Sitejabber
4.4