9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (8) TMI 1591X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s response in this regard was not received so far. Apart from that, the Petitioner/Trust was requested to send its response for the Standing Committee report immediately. However, the Fifth Respondent/Registrar (In charge), Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore, by proceedings bearing reference No. E1/AC.131/II.4/2016, dated 03.07.2016, had communicated the decision in respect of the reduction of students strength at 60 from the academic year 2016-2017 (in respect of B.Sc. (Agri) Degree Programme), considering the infrastructural facilities of the Petitioner/College, run by Sri Krishna Educational Trust, Bangalore. This Court pertinently points out that in between the letter dated 02.07.2016 of the Fifth Respondent/Registrar (In charge), Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore and proceedings dated 03.07.2016 of the Fifth Respondent/Registrar (In charge), Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore, there was a gap of only one day. In the letter dated 02.07.2016 of the Fifth Respondent/Registrar (In charge), Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore, the Petitioner/College, was requested to send its response for the Standing Committee Report immediately a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ween the Fifth Respondent/Registrar, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore and the Petitioner, on 7.7.2010. As pointed out by the Standing Committee report dated 2.5.2007, the required infrastructures and other facilities were developed in respect of the College. The College had required number of eminent Faculty Members, well-equipped Library, well-equipped Laboratories, Hostel, Orchard, fields, and other facilities, etc. Therefore, a request was made on 25.4.2011 to the Third Respondent seeking to increase the admission strength of the students for B.Sc (Agri) Degree course from 60 to 120 seats. Taking into account the infrastructural facilities available in the College, the Fifth Respondent/Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore, by means of proceedings dated 20.6.2011 provisionally approved the proposal for increasing the admission strength of B.Sc. (Agri) degree course from 60 to 120 seats from the academic year 2011-2012 onwards with a rider that infrastructure and other facilities should be fulfilled within three months. Indeed, all the infrastructural facilities required for the additional strength were fulfilled and the College has the infrastructural faci ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .7.2015 reverted back Dr. K. Sivasubramanian who was on deputation as Dean In charge of the College abruptly. Since the Dean was withdrawn by the University, a request was made by the Petitioner to permit the Trust to appoint a Dean for the College by way of direct recruitment by following the norms of TNAU/ICAR. However, there was no reply from the University. Therefore, the Fifth Respondent/Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore by means of communication dated 5.10.2015 asked the Petitioner to renew the Memorandum of Understanding entered between the University and the Petitioner Trust. Pursuant to the same, the Petitioner College gave objections for renewal of M.O.U on the ground that there is no clause as to the renewal of Memorandum of Understanding once in four years and the same is against the ingredients of Tamil Nadu Agricultural University Act 1971 and Statutes of the Tamil Nadu Agricultural University and its regulations. 2.3 As a matter of fact, a due reply was sent by the College relating to the ownership of the land possessed by it. In fact, the Third Respondent/Vice Chancellor and Chairman, Board of Management, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbator ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g good education for the single course viz. B.Sc (Agriculture). Therefore the demand of the Sree Krishna Education Trust to grant affiliation to offer additional courses was also not considered. (c). Besides, the Management of the College of Agricultural Technology has collected examination fees from the students, but failed to remit the required 65 per cent of the examination fee to the University in one lump sum but sent the examination fee in piece meal, as stated in its letter dated 5.12.2015. Further as admitted by the College in its letter dated 22.3.2016 the College is in arrears of remittance of the examination fee of Rs. 7,05,237/- for the academic years from 2012-2015 and the College has applied for time upto June 2016. As per the report of the Controller of Examinations of the University (vide letter dated 21.03.2016) also the actual total amount due from the College comes to Rs. 7,13,102/-. Thus the management of Sree Krishna Education Trust is not proper in remitting the examination fee due to the University, knowing well that non remittance of examination fee may lead to debarring the students from writing the examination besides creating administrative inconveni ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the hand book of guidelines for establishing Agricultural College, anything is stated pertaining to the fresh/renewal of Memorandum Of Understanding between the Tamil Nadu Agricultural University and affiliated Colleges. As against the communication dated 5.10.2015, objections were sent to the University on 18.2.2016. As such, it cannot be construed as deliberate breach of one of the conditions prescribed in the order of the Notification dated 7.7.2010. 2.6 Besides the above, even in the notification dated 7.7.2010, it was mentioned only to execute a MOU with TNAU before commencement of the course, which does not speak about the renewal of the MOU once in four years. It is false to state that the Petitioner had not satisfied the infrastructural facilities prescribed for B.Sc (Agri) in the guidelines of norms for affiliation of institutions to TNAU for offering B.Sc (Agri) Degree programme and thus committed a breach of Trust bonafide belief and expectation of the University. In fact, the Standing Sub Committee conducted an inspection on 30.4.2014 and pointed out certain minor deficiencies in their report and all the deficiencies as pointed out by the said Committee were rectif ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r on 08.06.2016 as to visit of Standing Committee of TNAU on 10.6.2016 to assess the infrastructure and other facilities available for continuing B.Sc (Agri) degree course. Since the College is fully equipped with vast extent of campus covering 130 acres with all facilities like academic block with 20 class rooms, 8 + 6 Laboratories, Hostel for Boys and Girls which could accommodate 800 students with all basic facilities but the standing committee though not approved by Board of Management as required under law, without any locus standi hurriedly visited the campus with a preconceived notion and left without verifying the facts besides conducting field inspection. When the matter came up for hearing on 20.06.2016 this Court extended the stay till 12.8.2016 with a rider to notify the students about the pendency of the writ petition besides the admission of students by the Institution for the current academic 2016-17 is subject to the result of the writ petition. On 27.6.2016, this Court was pleased to observe that in the light of the subsequent development in the form of the Standing Committee Report dated 10.6.2016 the Respondent University is at liberty to serve the same to the Pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r 2016-2017. Though the Counseling commenced on 04.07.2016, it was received by the Petitioner only on 08.07.2016. The signature dated 05.07.2016 of the Deputy Registrar (Education) would substantiate the Petitioner's contention. For the name sake, a response was sought for and without even providing 24 hours time, the subject order has been passed. There were many instances to the fact that the Fourth Respondent is bent on creating all sorts of troubles to close the Petitioner College. One instance is that every year the Tamil Nadu Agricultural University would issue a information Brochure for Under-Graduate admissions. As usual, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Under - Graduation Admissions 2016 - Information Brochure was published in the website of the University wherein in the caption of College details, Table - 2, i.e. Courses offered at affiliated Colleges of TNAU, a asterisk has been marked as against the course offered by our College. Below the above stated tabular column, it was found that the said asterisk is meant for subject to the decision/approval of the University . It is seen from the Brochure that the said asterisk is also found against 'Athiyamaan Colle ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s Court and the same is pending. Inasmuch the impugned order was issued due to the lack of infrastructure and the Writ Petition filed in respect of the same is pending, as stated supra, the present writ petition filed by the Petitioner is clearly abuse of process of Law and the Court. Therefore, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed on that score. 3.2 As a matter of fact, in the interim order passed on 27.06.2016 in W.P. No. 14328 of 2016, the Principal Seat of this Court had granted liberty to the Fifth Respondent to serve the standing committee report to the Petitioner and after eliciting their response, shall proceed further in accordance with law. In fact, the Standing Inspection Committee report was already sent on 21.06.2016 to the Petitioner/College and the Petitioner/College had not responded and therefore, a reminder was sent on 02.07.2016. Even then, the Petitioner had not responded and in view of the Counseling process for admission of students for the year 2016-2017 was fixed, the Academic Council which met on 03.07.2016, has taken stock of the infrastructure and situation at all the Agricultural Colleges (including private Agricultural Colleges) and had consid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tioner/College for a single Course i.e. B.Sc.(Agri.) course, the request made to offer new courses so as to mint money without the required infrastructure facilities was not considered by the University, which is well within the domain of Experts of the University and valid in law. In regard to the Admission Information Brochure, 2015 the University had directed the candidates being admitted to the private Colleges, also to remit the First year fee to the University. It is pointed out that as per the conditions of MOU, the University offered to provide the services of Senior Professors to serve as Principals in the Private Agricultural College on Foreign Service terms and conditions, to take up responsibility of students education and to maintain their performance on par with the student of University Colleges and the private Colleges accepted the same. In respect of two Colleges (including the Petitioner/College), they had not paid the salary to the Professor deputed to serve as Principal on the last working of the month as per the Government norms. Apart from that, the Petitioner/College had not paid Leave salary also to the deputed Professor, though there is a provision for r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng the College so as to have continuous practical class by way of cultivation in the same land by the students as a part of agricultural education syllabi and curricula. However, in respect of Petitioner/College, the land was not in the name of College or Trust, but the land is owned by some other body viz. Lotus Gardens Private Ltd., Bangalore, which is a clear violation of accepted condition. Moreover, many reports received on encroachment, land grabbing, threatening, coercion etc. from local public. Therefore, the Respondent/University had issued the Show Cause Notice, dated 30.03.2016, which is under interim stay before the Principal Seat of this Court. 3.8 As regards the allegation made against the Fourth Respondent, it is denied as misleading and false. Further, the Fourth Respondent is very much interested in the academic performance of all the students, who are getting Degrees from the Respondent/University, since the University is world renowned and is getting schemes and projects from National and International Agencies, bodies etc. and further so many Civil Service Appointees are the alumni of this University and hence, the Fourth Respondent is taking all efforts to r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... plete the required infrastructure, but the Petitioner/College kept silent and had not responded. Therefore on 02.07.2016, a further letter was sent to Petitioner/College, for which also, there is no response from the Petitioner/College. Therefore, based on over all stock situation of all the Colleges for admission of the students for the academic year 2016-2017, the Academic Council, supreme statutory body in respect of academic matters, has considered the show cause notice issued to the Petitioner/College and the irresponsive attitude of the Petitioner/College and the report of Standing Committee to reduce the admission strength from 120 to 60 and also considered that the show cause notice issued for withdrawal of provisional affiliation itself is stringent than reduction of admission strength. Therefore, it had directed to reduce the students admission strength from 120 to 60 based on 44.30% infrastructure available, which is valid in law. 3.11 Though the infrastructural facilities are not satisfied for 120 students, the Petitioner/College wanted to increase the admission strength from 120 to 240 to mint money only without taking care of the academic performance and services t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing care of fulfilling the requirement for students' education, academic performance and welfare. The standing committees report has not been specifically denied by producing the records for fulfillment of the deficiencies or inviting the Standing Committee for re-inspection. However, the Petitioner/College has chosen to come before the Court whenever any direction is issued in the interest of students education, academic performance and welfare etc. In respect of some Medical Colleges, due to lack of infrastructure facilities, the students had agitated and were distributed and transferred to other Colleges and in such circumstances, the University became answerable for not monitoring the Colleges. Therefore, to avoid such a contingency, the Fifth Respondent/University has taken action, which is not malafide and illegal. 4. The Submissions of the Petitioner/College:-- 4.1 According to the Learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioner/College, the impugned order, dated 03.07.2016 issued by the Fifth Respondent/University, to the Petitioner/College, in and by which, the reduction of students strength was made from 160 to 60 for the academic year 2016-2017, is an illegal and a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f of the Petitioner/College that straightaway the impugned order, dated was passed by the Fifth Respondent/University by reducing the students strength, which is against the procedure contemplated under Law, Statutes and Regulations of the University. 4.5 It is the contention of the Petitioner/College that the act of the Third and Fifth Respondent suffers from vice of predetermination of mind and earlier Standing Committee visited the Petitioner's College on 30.04.2014 pointing out certain minor deficiencies, which were constructive in nature and the same were implemented in letter and spirit and filed action taken report thereon. Under the said circumstances, the so called Standing Committee, which inspected on 10.06.2016 has not taken into consideration the earlier standing committee report and action taken thereon. In this connection, the Learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioner/College takes a plea that from that point, the inspection should have commenced, but the reading of the remarks which is against their own findings would clearly establish that they want to satisfy their master for vested reasons. 4.6 At this juncture, the Learned Senior Counsel for the Petiti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e a good start for effectively imparting education, with ancillary requisites may be considered sufficient, in the extraordinary circumstances of this case. (h) It is impractical to insist, for a fool proof or absolute adherence to all requirements without regard to their importance or relevance, for the purpose of imparting education, in a practical way, especially because the institution has begun to function, students admitted to institution have taken the examination and the fate of a good many number of students should not hang in the balance in an unending or everlasting manner. (i) In the final analysis, the question to be posed, is whether there exists the minimal and satisfactory requirements to keep the matter going, and not whether better arrangements that will render the set up more efficient and more satisfactory, should be insisted as a wooden rule. (j) It may be that there are some minor deficiencies here and there which call for rectification. Time can certainly set right such matters. What is required is a total, practical, overall view in the light of the latest tabular statement filed along with the affidavit dated 4.9.1995 material placed before ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ddressed to the Petitioner/College submits that the Petitioner/College was required to rectify the deficiencies in its ownership of land of the Petitioner/College/Trust, construction of buildings and hostel to cope with the students requirement and to furnish a report on the complaint received against Trust on land grabbing of private land, encroachment of forest land, illegal quarrying of earth, rough stone, illicit taping of electricity and water, etc. Before 30.11.2015. 5.3 Further, it is represented on behalf of the Respondents 3 to 5 that on 5.10.2015, the Fifth Respondent/Registrar (incharge), Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore, requested the Petitioner/College, to renew the 'Memorandum Of Understanding', which contains new conditions to cope up with the development of academic and introduction of on-line admission system etc. 5.4 The Learned Counsel for the Respondents 3 to 5, by referring to the Petitioner's reply dated 19.10.2015, submits that the Petitioner had not produced land ownership records, but furnished a reply that the 'Board of Trustees' of Petitioner/Trust, will provide undertaking from the Board of M/s. Lotus Gardens Priva ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... acility is very poor. Library is inadequate for current strength of 480 days for four years. Only 1350 books are available after the passing of six years from the establishment of the College. (v). No placement cell. (vi). No central instrumentation facility with essential instruments, viz. HPLC, GC, GLC, HPTLC, AAS, pH Meter, Colorimeter, Pressure Plate apparatus, Flame photometer, EC meter etc. (vii). Hostel facilities is only partial. 5 boys accommodate in each room and 5 or 6 girls are accommodated in each room. (viii). No medical facilities. (ix). Practical classes are not conducted by taking the students to fields as crops are not raised systematically in different seasons. (x). Teaching staff are not sufficient. (only 16 teachers + 3 retired staff are working). (xi). NSS students are used as labours for harvesting, weeding, stone picking from field. (xii). Sports materials are inadequate. (xiii). No generator. (xiv). No shelf, chair and table in the hostel. 5.7 Further, the Learned Counsel for the Respondents 3 to 5 contends that the Standing Committee, because of the Petitioner's College Score Card has only 44. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... implemented. However, the Petitioner in the reply had not chosen to comply with the deficiencies pointed out by the Standing Committee on 18.06.2016, but demanded to restore the original strength of 120. Further, the Fifth Respondent sent Score Card of the Standing Committee to Petitioner to take up the remedial measure under each and every item. However, on 19.07.2016, the Petitioner had not furnished any reply on the fulfillment of the deficiencies pointed in the said SCORE CARD, but sent its own Self Assessment Score stating that the College has 925/1000 score i.e. A grade, which is not acceptable one. 5.11 The Learned Counsel for the Respondents 3 to 5 submits that the guidelines issued in 2007, is only for 60 students admission per year and as directed in the G.O. Ms. No. 123, the Petitioner has to fulfill all the infrastructural facilities within 6 months time granted therein as well as directed by the University in the order dated 07.07.2010 and as agreed by the Petitioner in the MOU signed on 07.07.2010. Further, it is projected on the side of the Petitioner/College/Trust from the beginning was granted time, but it had not satisfied the same for 60 students. 5.12 T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e order of the Government granting temporary recognition was challenged before the High Court- and the said petition was also disposed of by the impugned judgment. We see no force in the contention of the Learned Counsel. All those institutes which did not have permanent recognition before the issue of the Recognition Rules are bound to comply with the said conditions before they are entitled to permanent recognition. The High Court was justified in holding that the institutions which were operating on the basis of temporary recognitions, either under the orders of the Courts or otherwise, shall to comply with the recognition rules to enable them to earn recognition. 5.13 The Learned Counsel for the Respondents 3 to 5 relies on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in BABA MUNGIPA MEDICAL COLLEGE AND RESEARCH CENTRE STUDENTS GUARDIAN FORUMS AND ANOTHER v. GOVT. OF TRIPURA AND OTHERS reported in AIR 1997 SC 3999, wherein at paragraph Nos. 3 to 5, it is observed and held as under:-- 3. The case of the Trust is that there is no reason not to grand recognition to this College. Some deficiencies in the facilities to be provided by the College have been noted by the Med ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Some persons consider nothing wrong in commercialising education. Still however, private institutions cannot be permitted to have educational 'shops' in the country. Therefore, there are statutory prohibitions for establishing and administering educational institution without prior permission or approval by the concerned authority. On occasions, the concerned authorities, for various reasons, fail to discharge their function in accordance with the statutory provisions, rules and regulations. In some cases, because of the zeal to establish such educational institution by persons having means to do so, approach the authorities, but because of red-tapism or for extraneous reasons, such permissions are not granted or are delayed. As against this, it has been pointed out that instead of charitable institutions, persons having means, considering the demands of the market rush for establishing technical educational institutions including medical College or dental College as a commercial venture with sole object of earning profits and/or for some other purpose. Such institutions fail to observe the norms prescribed under the Act or the Regulations and exploit the situation becaus ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ame and style of 'College of Agricultural Technology' at Kullapuram, Theni District for offering B.Sc (Agri) Degree Course after duly obtaining affiliation from the Fifth Respondent from the academic year 2010-2011 together with other conditions. More particularly, all the aspects in the report of the Standing Committee (Contrition No. 2) was to be satisfied and six months time was granted to fulfill the conditions (Condition No. 11) and that the Respondent/University would follow its guidelines for grant affiliation to the Agriculture College (Condition No. 12). Furthermore, on 07.07.2010, the Respondent/University passed an order granting provisional affiliation for B.Sc (Agri) Degree Course only from the academic year 2010-2011 with students strength of 60 prescribing important conditions that the conditions prescribed by the Government and the University should be fulfilled within six months, the infrastructure and other facilities should be filled up within six months, failing which, the affiliation would be withdrawn and the Trust should abide by the conditions, if any, prescribed by the University. 6.2 It comes to be known that on 07.07.2010, the Petitioner had si ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed W.P.(MD) No. 10807 of 2015, before the Madurai Bench of this Court, challenging the Admission Information Brochure for the year 2015, since it is the plea of the Petitioner that the same is not in consonance with the Tamil Nadu Agricultural University Act, 1971, besides the agreement entered into between the Fifth Respondent/Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore and the Petitioner. It appears that in M.P.(MD) No. 2 of 2015 in W.P.(MD) No. 10807 of 2015, an interim injunction was granted on 13.06.2015. 6.6 It is also represented on behalf of the Respondents 3 to 5 that the Petitioner/College had not paid the 'Leave salary' to the Principal of the Petitioner/College (though under foreign service terms and conditions, the Petitioner/College should pay leave salary and reimburse the same amount from the University). As such, the Professor reported relinquished the post of the Principal of the College, for which, it is the stand of the Respondents 3 to 5 that the University ought not to be blamed. 6.7 Apart from the above, it is brought to the notice of this Court that the Fifth Respondent/Registrar of the University issued show cause notice on 30.03.2016 basic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... atore, nowhere an explanation was sought for from the Petitioner, but a perusal of the said letter, dated 21.06.2016 clearly indicates that the copy of the Standing Committee report (inspected on 10.06.2016) for rectification of the deficiencies at the earliest, was sent to the Petitioner/Trust/College and in fact, it was also mentioned that the details of land document provided by the Trust will be verified and the land details will be sent separately. As a matter of fact, only on 02.07.2016, an explanation was sought for the report of the Standing Committee. Indeed, in the letter bearing No. E1/W.P. No. 14238/2016, dated 02.07.2016, the Fifth Respondent/Registrar (In charge), Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore, addressed to the Petitioner had requested for sending for response for the Standing Committee Report immediately. On the next day on 03.07.2016, by means of proceedings in reference No. E.1/AC. 131/II.4/2016, dated 03.07.2016, the Registrar (incharge) of the Fifth Respondent/University, has passed the following order:-- The Academic Council of Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore, in their 131st Meeting held on 03.07.2016 has accepted the report ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l, 'Fairness of Procedure', is the corner stone of legality. The non-observance of Natural Justice itself is a proof of prejudice and proof of prejudice independently of proof of denial of Natural Justice, was unnecessary, as opined by this Court. 6.18 In the instant case on hand, the Fifth Respondent/Registrar (In charge), Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore, in reference No. E1/W.P. No. 14238/2016, dated 02.07.2016, addressed to the Petitioner had observed that the Standing Committee in the report in respect of reduction of students strength from 120 to 60 and time limit of six months for improving the infrastructure facility and staff strength was already sent on 21.06.2016 and the same was forwarded. On 23.06.2016 and further informed that the Petitioner's response in this regard was not received so far. Apart from that, the Petitioner/Trust was requested to send its response for the Standing Committee report immediately. However, the Fifth Respondent/Registrar (In charge), Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore, by proceedings bearing reference No. E1/AC.131/II.4/2016, dated 03.07.2016, had communicated the decision in respect of the reduction ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... charge), Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore, and sets aside the same. 6.20 In fine, the writ petition is allowed leaving the parties to bear their own costs. The impugned proceedings in No. E1/AC. 131/II.4/2016 of the Fifth Respondent/Registrar (In charge), Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore, dated 03.07.2016, is hereby set aside by this Court for the reasons assigned in this writ petition. The Academic Council of the Respondent/University is directed to look into the reply of the Petitioner/Trust/College, dated 07.07.2016 in threadbare fashion (for the Standing Committee Report) and to take a final decision in the subject matter in issue by providing necessary opportunity to the Petitioner/College/Trust by adhering to the Principles of Natural Justice and to pass a reasoned speaking order on merits in a fair, free, with an open unbiased mind and that too, in a dispassionate manner, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, of course in the manner known to Law and in accordance with Law. In case, before the Academic Council, the Petitioner/Trust/College is in requirement of any personal hearing, then, if situation so ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
