SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Bom) 1510

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY GOA BENCH
M. S. Sonak, R.N. Laddha, JJ.
Archdiocesan Board Of Education & Ors. - Appellants
Versus
Goa University & Ors. - Respondents
Writ Petition No.321 of 2014
Decided On : 10-06-2022

Advocates appeared:
J.E. Coelho Pereira, Advocate, Vledson Braganza, Advocate, B. Fernandes, Advocate, A.A. Agni, Advocate, Jay Sawaikar, Advocate, Amira Razaq, Advocate

The rights of minorities to establish and administer educational institutions of their choice under Article 30 of the Constitution of India are subject to reasonable regulations that are necessary to ensure the quality of education and the proper functioning of the institutions.

Headnote:

U.G.C. REGULATIONS - MINORITY EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS - APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS AND OTHER ACADEMIC STAFF - COMPOSITION OF SELECTION COMMITTEES - VALIDITY - ARTICLE 30 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA - INTERPRETATION.

Fact of the Case:

Petitioners, who have established and administer several minority educational institutions affiliated with Goa University, challenged the U.G.C. Regulations 2010 and 2018 and the statutes framed by Goa University under Notification No.2/155/13-Legal / amendment - State(New)/2013/Vol.vi/1947 dated 02/08/2013, contending that these regulations and statutes are either inapplicable to them or are ultra vires article 30 of the Constitution of India.

Finding of the Court:

The Court held that the provisions of the U.G.C. Regulations 2010 and 2018 and the Goa University Statutes are regulatory and reasonable and do not make any inroads on the rights of the minorities to establish and administer educational institutions of their choice. The Court further held that the requirement of having a representative of the Directorate of Higher Education, Government of Goa, in the selection committee for teachers and academic staff in minority institutions is ultra vires article 30(1) of the Constitution.

Issues: 1. Whether the U.G.C. Regulations 2010 and 2018 and the Goa University Statutes are applicable to minority educational institutions? 2. Whether the provisions of the U.G.C. Regulations 2010 and 2018 and the Goa University Statutes are ultra vires article 30 of the Constitution of India?

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The provisions of the U.G.C. Regulations 2010 and 2018 and the Goa University Statutes are regulatory and reasonable and do not make any inroads on the rights of the minorities to establish and administer educational institutions of their choice. 2. The requirement of having a representative of the Directorate of Higher Education, Government of Goa, in the selection committee for teachers and academic staff in minority institutions is ultra vires article 30(1) of the Constitution.

Final Decision: The Court declared Clause (vii) of Statute SC-16.5.1 and similar provisions in other Goa University Statutes as ultra vires article 30(1) of the Constitution to the extent such provisions are sought to be made applicable to the colleges notified/declared as minority educational institutions.

JUDGMENT

M.S. Sonak, J. - Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

2. The Petitioners who have established and administer several minority educational institutions affiliated with the Goa University have instituted this Petition to seek the following reliefs :

    (i) For a declaration that the U.G.C. Regulations 2010 and U.G.C. Regulations 2018 concerning the appointments of teachers and other academic staff in affiliated institutions/ colleges established and administered by the religious minorities are either inapplicable to them or are ultra vires article 30 of the Constitution of India, to the extent they are made applicable to them. (Prayer Clause (a) and (a1)).

    (ii) For a similar declaration concerning the statutes framed by the Goa University under Notification No.2/155/13-Legal / amendment - State(New)/2013/Vol.vi/1947 dated 02/08/2013 since it is the Petitioners' case that these statutes/amendments are in pursuance of the U.G.C. Regulations, 2010 (Prayer Clause (a)).

    (Prayer Clause (a)).

    3. at the outset, we must note that though there is clarity about the U.G.C. Regulations, 2010 and 2018, there is a great deal of confusion about the various statutes/amendments framed by the Goa University concerning the manner and the mode of selection of the teachers and academic staff in the affiliated institutions/colleges. In most cases, new statutes have been framed to more or less align with the U.G.C. Regulations. However, there is no corresponding amendment or deletions of the earlier statutes. as a result, it was quite challenging to appreciate the precise status and legal efficacy of the several statutes on the subject.

    4. Mr. J. E. Colelho Pereira learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioners handed in a note on 06/04/2022. He first referred to Statutes SC 3 and SC 5 concerning the manner and mode of selection and appointment of teachers and academic staff in the affiliated colleges/institutions. Both these statutes contained a proviso, making inapplicable several such provisions to the colleges and institutions established and administered by minorities in deference to the constitutional protection under article 30(1) of the Constitution. The note points out that even though Statutes SC 3 and SC 5 were amended on 31/12/2000, the proviso protecting the minority institutions/colleges was retained and continued.

    5. The note then points out to Statutes 16 and 20 that entered force on 20/08/2013 to align with the U.G.C. Regulations of 2010 on the subject. Finally, the note points out that the amended statutes on the subject are set out in annexure D to the Petition.

    6. On 05/02/2013, the petitioners protested to the Vice-Chancellor of the Goa University about the amended statutes infringing the rights of the minorities to establish and administer their educational institutions. However, this representation was not considered by the Vice-Chancellor. Instead, by Circular dated 17/01/2014, the Managing Committees of all the affiliated colleges and institutions were informed that no person could be appointed to a teaching post without following the amendment/statutes now impugned in this Petition. aggrieved by this, the Petitioners instituted this Petition on 03/06/2014, praying, among other things, for certain interim reliefs.

    7. By an order dated 1/7/2014, this Court made the following operative interim order :

      "4. By way of interim relief implementation of regulations no. 5.1.4,5.1.5,5.1.6,6.3.3,6.3.4, 6.3.5,6.3.6,6.5.0,6.5.1 of respondent no. 2 and consequently implementation of Statute nos. 20(B)(4), 20(B)(5), and 20(B)(7) by respondent no.1 are stayed qua to the petitioner. Circular of the respondent no.1 dated 17.1.2014 issued by respondent no.1 to the extent of direction to the affiliated colleges to follow the manner and mode of selection in the above regulations and statute qua to the petitioner is stayed."

      8. Pending the Petition, the U.G.C., by Notification dated 18/7/2018, introduced U.G.C. Regulations on minimum qualifications for appo

              Click Here to Read the rest of this document
              1
              2
              3
              4
              5
              6
              7
              8
              9
              10
              11
              SupremeToday Portrait Ad
              supreme today icon
              logo-black

              An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

              Please visit our Training & Support
              Center or Contact Us for assistance

              qr

              Scan Me!

              India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

              For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

              whatsapp-icon Back to top