The judgment establishes the recognition of the rights of private unaided educational institutions in admission processes, the supremacy of AICTE Regulations over State norms, and the State Government's power to improve the standards set by Central agencies.

1. Writ Petitions No. 16849/2005 and 16851/2005 are filed by the Rashtreeya Sikshana Samithi Trust and the Karnataka Private Post-Graduate Colleges Association and others challenging the provision of R. 5 of the Karnataka Selection of Candidates for Admission to Master of Business Administration and Master of Computer Application as illegal with a further writ of declaration seeking for striking down the impugned Rules, notified under Notification of Education Secretariat dated 21-5-2005 as per Annexure ‘L.’ The petitioner seeks for a declaration declaring that it is incompetent for the State Government to regulate admissions in post-graduate courses of MBA and MCA in the petitioners-institutions. They want the communication, Annexure ‘M’ to be declared as unenforceable in these petitions.

2. Facts in brief are as under :

The petitioner-Institutions are unaided and self-financing educational institutions, duly approved by the authorities of AICTE. The admissions are carried on after due advertisement, calling for applications and conduct of an admission test, including interview and group discussions. The State Government has no competence to regulate any part of the ‘admissions’ to the petitioner-institutions. However, the petitioners have agreed to admit students to the balance of 50% of its total intake. Regulations of the AICTE were made in exercise of powers, under a Parliamentary enactment, which having been made under Entry 66 of List I of 7th Schedule. It is an exclusive field of legislation and the State Government or its executive does not get any power/competence or authority to regulate the Parliament expressing intention to occupy the entire field for proper co-ordination and maintenance of uniform standards throughout the country. Regulations that are sought to be enforced, violate their constitutional guarantees and are unenforceable in terms of the laws governing such admissions. The Supreme Court in a reference has heard the matter and the decision is awaited and in view of the need to commence the courses of study on schedule, they have reconciled and opted without prejudice to their rights and they have participated in conduct of a ‘Common Entrance Test’ for selection to MBA course in their Institution, being conducted by the Karnataka Private Post-Graduate College’s Association (for short the ‘Association’). Large number of students have appeared and ranks, based on assessment of academic merit, and a written test is assigned. Classes are to commence from 2nd September, 2005. The petitioners are entitled to make admission in terms of the instructions of AICTE and or the UGC which regulate and prescribe the standards, has for the current year, decided to admit the students taking note of and from out of merit list prepared under an Association’s Test.

3. All India Council for Technical Education is a Statutory body. A Trust was established under AICTE Act, 1987 as a National Expert body to advise the Central Government, for ensuring the co-ordinated development of Technical Education. The Parliament in exercise of its power under Entry 66 of List I, passed an All India Council for Technical Education Act, 1987,’ which came into force on 28-3-1988. In exercise of powers conferred by Cl. (J)(O) of S. 10 read with S. 23, under the provisions of the AICTE Act, 1987, AICTE has notified All India Council for Technical Education (Norms and Guidelines for Fees and Guidelines for admission in profession colleges) Regulations, 1994. Regulation 1994 provides for norms and standards for management education and computer application. The State has enacted Karnataka Educational Institution (Prohibition of Capitation Fee) Act, 1984, in furtherance of its power under Entry 25 of List II. It seeks to prevent the commercialisation in the matter of imparting education. The State attempted to take over the admission process’ in its entirety. They have published the admission Rules for 2002. They were questioned before this Co