PA college refutes allegations of denying hall ticket, pressurizing over UUCMS fee payment issue
Mangaluru: A fee payment issue faced by a section of students using the Unified University College Management System (UUCMS) has been resolved, according to the authorities of P.A. First Grade College. The matter, which affected 27 out of 768 students from the institution, had caused confusion and allegations, prompting the college to issue a clarification.
The UUCMS, introduced in 2021 by the Government of Karnataka, requires students to pay their examination fees directly through the portal. Previously, students paid fees to their respective colleges, which then transferred the amount to the university. While most students successfully processed their fees through UUCMS, the payment status for 27 students showed as "INITIATED," even though the amount was deducted from their bank accounts. The issue, however, was not isolated, reportedly impacting around 3,000 students across various institutions affiliated with Mangalore University, read the release.
It further stated that following complaints, the university circulated a Google form to gather details of affected students. Subsequently, during an online meeting on November 28, 2024, the university directed colleges to ask students to pay their fees again to ensure their data would be reflected in the portal for hall ticket generation. Failure to do so would prevent them from appearing in the exam. The directive, communicated to the students, led to dissatisfaction among them, with some expressing resistance to paying the fees twice. A few parents and students sought clarification from the college, which explained that the issue was from the UUCMS system by the Government of Karnataka and not the college.
However, one second-year B.Sc. student, Ayisha Afna, filed a police complaint at Konaje station, alleging illegal fee demands by the college. Following the complaint, students and parents met with the Vice Chancellor of Mangalore University, seeking resolution. The college, meanwhile, continued to engage with university authorities and the UUCMS team to address the issue.
According to the statement, on December 7, 2024, the university authorities informed the college that the issue had been resolved. College staff were directed to submit the necessary student details to the university, ensuring that all students, including those who had filed complaints, would receive their hall tickets. The college principal contacted the complainant's father to inform them of the resolution and reiterated the same during a meeting at the university premises.
Despite the resolution, a press conference held by Aysha Afna, Reshna Misiriya, Parent Abdul Khader and advocate Saheed Badduron December 9, 2024, reportedly alleged that the college and university authorities were pressuring students to withdraw the complaint and denying hall tickets.
The college principal has categorically denied these allegations, asserting that the matter was resolved by the university on December 7, 2024. It was clarified that hall tickets could only be generated from December 9, 2024, as per the university's update.
The college has assured students that their hall tickets will be distributed on the day of the examination to save them unnecessary travel.
Additionally, the college authorities have urged the public to disregard baseless allegations.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Deep societal faultlines persist despite 75 years of independence: Justice Ujjal Bhuyan
Judge cites denial of home to Muslim girl, opposition to Dalit women cooking mid-day meals
Hyderabad, February 23, 2026: Supreme Court judge Justice Ujjal Bhuyan has said that despite repeated affirmations of constitutional morality by courts, deep societal faultlines rooted in caste and religious discrimination continue to shape everyday realities in India.
Speaking at a seminar on “Constitutional Morality and the Role of District Judiciary” organised by the Telangana Judges Association and the Telangana State Judicial Academy in Hyderabad, Justice Bhuyan reflected on the gap between constitutional ideals and social practices.
He cited a recent instance involving his daughter’s friend, a PhD scholar at a private university in Noida, who was denied accommodation in South Delhi after her surname revealed her Muslim identity. According to Justice Bhuyan, the landlady bluntly informed her that no accommodation was available once her religious background became known.
In another example from Odisha, he referred to resistance by some parents to the government’s mid-day meal programme because the food was prepared by Dalit women employed as cooks. He noted that some parents had objected aggressively and refused to allow their children to consume meals cooked by members of the Scheduled Caste community.
Describing these incidents as “the tip of the iceberg,” Justice Bhuyan said they reveal how far society remains from the benchmark of constitutional morality even 75 years into the Republic. He observed that while the Constitution lays down standards of equality and dignity, the morality practised within homes and communities often diverges sharply from those values.
He emphasised that constitutional morality requires governance through the rule of law rather than the rule of popular opinion. Referring to the evolution of the doctrine through judicial decisions, he cited Naz Foundation v Union of India, in which the Delhi High Court read down Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, holding that popular morality cannot restrict fundamental rights under Article 21. Though the judgment was later overturned in Suresh Kumar Koushal v Naz Foundation, the Supreme Court ultimately restored and expanded the principle in Navtej Singh Johar v Union of India, affirming that constitutional morality must prevail over majoritarian views.
“In our constitutional scheme, it is the constitutionality of the issue before the court that is relevant, not the dominant or popular view,” he said.
Justice Bhuyan also addressed the functioning of the district judiciary, underlining that trial courts are the first point of contact for most litigants and form the foundation of the justice delivery system. He stressed that due importance must be given to the recording of evidence and adjudication of bail matters.
Highlighting the role of High Courts, he said their supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution is intended as a shield to correct grave jurisdictional errors, not as a mechanism to substitute the discretion or factual appreciation of trial judges.
He recalled that several distinguished judges, including Justice H R Khanna, Justice A M Ahmadi, and Justice Fathima Beevi, began their careers in the district judiciary.
On representation within the judicial system, Justice Bhuyan noted that Telangana has made significant strides in gender inclusion. Out of a sanctioned strength of 655 judicial officers in the Telangana Judicial Service, 478 are currently serving, of whom 283 are women, exceeding 50 per cent representation. He added that members of Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, minority communities, and persons with disabilities are also represented in the state’s judiciary.
He observed that greater representation of women, marginalised communities, persons with disabilities, and sexual minorities would help make the judiciary more inclusive and reflective of India’s diversity. “The judiciary must represent all the colours of the rainbow and become a rainbow institution,” he said.
Justice Bhuyan also referred to the recent restoration by the Supreme Court of the requirement of a minimum three years of practice at the Bar for entry-level judicial posts. While acknowledging that the requirement ensures practical exposure, he cautioned that its impact on women aspirants, especially those from rural or small-town backgrounds facing social and financial constraints, would need to be carefully observed over time.
Concluding his address, he reiterated that the justice system must strive to bridge the gap between constitutional ideals and lived realities, ensuring that the rule of law remains paramount.
