Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
S. RAVINDRA BHAT, A.K. CHAWLA, JJ.
Students Federation of India And Ors. – Petitioners
Versus
Union of India & Ors. – Respondents
W.P.(C) 3032 of 2017, C.M. APPL. 13252 of 2017, W.P.(C) 2665 of 2018, C.M. APPL. 10866 of 2018
Decided On : 01-10-2018
UGC (Minimum Standards and Procedure for Award of M.Phil./Ph.D. Degrees) Regulations, 2016 - Validity - Challenge - UGC Regulations, 2016 - Validity - Challenge - Whether the impugned regulations are arbitrary and unreasonable and have the effect of inducing a drastic reduction in M.Phil./Ph.D. seats all over the country, thereby undermining the future of lakhs of students, both in the reserved and unreserved category - Whether the third respondent - Jawaharlal Nehru University ("JNU") has provided only 102 seats in the M. Phil/PH. D courses in the current academic year i.e. 2017-18 as compared to 970 seats in the previous academic year i.e. 2016-17 - Whether the impugned regulations are arbitrary and unreasonable and have the effect of inducing a drastic reduction in M.Phil./Ph.D. seats all over the country, thereby undermining the future of lakhs of students, both in the reserved and unreserved category - Whether the third respondent - Jawaharlal Nehru University ("JNU") has provided only 102 seats in the M. Phil/PH. D courses in the current academic year i.e. 2017-18 as compared to 970 seats in the previous academic year i.e. 2016-17.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners are aggrieved by the implementation of the University Grants Commission (Minimum Standards and Procedure for Award of M.Phil./Ph.D. Degrees) Regulations, 2016 (hereafter “the impugned regulations”) and complain that they are unreasonable and arbitrary and have the effect of inducing a drastic reduction in M.Phil./Ph.D. seats all over the country, thereby undermining the future of lakhs of students, both in the reserved and unreserved category. They complain that the third respondent - Jawaharlal Nehru University (“JNU” hereafter) has provided only 102 seats in the M. Phil/PH. D courses in the current academic year i.e. 2017-18 as compared to 970 seats in the previous academic year i.e. 2016-17.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that Regulation 5.4 of the UGC Regulations in so far as it permits filling of M.Phil./Ph.D. entirely on the basis of cent percent evaluation of performance in the viva voce process is arbitrary. The said regulation is, therefore, declared void and contrary to Article 14; The absence of any concession with respect to the minimum qualifying marks in the written test, in the UGC Regulations of 2016 to reserved category candidates (SC/ST/OBC) and physically disabled candidates is also without proper application of mind. Appropriate concession is to be given by the UGC and the JNU, taking into account the seats filled, having regard to the implementation of the regulations in the last two academic years; The JNU is directed to take suitable review action to ensure that in any given academic year, no M.Phil./Ph.D. seat is left unfilled. It is also held that the UGC guidelines of 2016 in so far as they prescribe the supervisor-researcher/student ratio is valid.
Issues: Whether the impugned regulations are arbitrary and unreasonable and have the effect of inducing a drastic reduction in M.Phil./Ph.D. seats all over the country, thereby undermining the future of lakhs of students, both in the reserved and unreserved category - Whether the third respondent - Jawaharlal Nehru University ("JNU") has provided only 102 seats in the M. Phil/PH. D courses in the current academic year i.e. 2017-18 as compared to 970 seats in the previous academic year i.e. 2016-17 - Whether the impugned regulations are arbitrary and unreasonable and have the effect of inducing a drastic reduction in M.Phil./Ph.D. seats all over the country, thereby undermining the future of lakhs of students, both in the reserved and unreserved category - Whether the third respondent - Jawaharlal Nehru University ("JNU") has provided only 102 seats in the M. Phil/PH. D courses in the current academic year i.e. 2017-18 as compared to 970 seats in the previous academic year i.e. 2016-17.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that Regulation 5.4 of the UGC Regulations in so far as it permits filling of M.Phil./Ph.D. entirely on the basis of cent percent evaluation of performance in the viva voce process is arbitrary. The said regulation is, therefore, declared void and contrary to Article 14; The absence of any concession with respect to the minimum qualifying marks in the written test, in the UGC Regulations of 2016 to reserved category candidates (SC/ST/OBC) and physically disabled candidates is also without proper application of mind. Appropriate concession is to be given by the UGC and the JNU, taking into account the seats filled, having regard to the implementation of the regulations in the last two academic years; The JNU is directed to take suitable review action to ensure that in any given academic year, no M.Phil./Ph.D. seat is left unfilled. It is also held that the UGC guidelines of 2016 in so far as they prescribe the supervisor-researcher/student ratio is valid.
Final Decision: The writ petitions are partly allowed in the above terms. There shall be no order on costs.
S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J.
Facts
1. The petitioners are aggrieved by the implementation of the University Grants Commission (Minimum Standards and Procedure for Award of M.Phil./Ph.D. Degrees) Regulations, 2016 (hereafter “the impugned regulations”) and complain that they are unreasonable and arbitrary and have the effect of inducing a drastic reduction in M.Phil./Ph.D. seats all over the country, thereby undermining the future of lakhs of students, both in the reserved and unreserved category. They complain that the third respondent - Jawaharlal Nehru University (“JNU” hereafter) has provided only 102 seats in the M. Phil/PH. D courses in the current academic year i.e. 2017-18 as compared to 970 seats in the previous academic year i.e. 2016-17.
2. The brief facts are that the University Grants Commission (“UGC” hereafter) was constituted by virtue of an Act of Parliament in 1956. Thereafter in 1966, the JNU was set up under a separate Parliamentary enactment. The petition refers to the ninety third constitution amendment, brought into force with effect from 20th January, 2006, which added the following provision, after Article 15 (4) :
"(5) Nothing in this article or in sub-clause (g) of clause (1) of article 19 shall prevent the State from making any special provision, by law, for the advancement of any socially and educationally backward classes of citizens or for the Scheduled Castes or the Scheduled Tribes in so far as such special provisions relate to their admission to educational institutions including private educational institutions, whether aided or unaided by the State, other than the minority educational institutions referred to in clause (1) of article 30.”
3. The petitioners also allude to the Central Educational Institutions (Reservation In Admission) Act, 2006 ("CEI Act” hereafter) came into force which provides for the reservation in admission of the students belonging to the Scheduled Castes, the Scheduled Tribes and the Other Backward Classes of citizens, to certain Central Educational Institutions established, maintained or aided by the Central Government, and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto. It is pertinent to mention that Section 5 of the Act provides for mandatory increase of seats notwithstanding the number of annual permitted seats in terms of Section 3 (3) of the CEI Act, for the academic session immediately preceding the date of the coming into force of the said Act. This, it is said, implied a 54% increase in the number of seats in reference to the number of seats available in 2006. It is submitted that for academic year (AY) 2008-09, in compliance with Section 5 (of the CEI Act) and having regard to the ruling of the Supreme Court in the Ashok Kumar Thakur vs. Union of India, (2008) 6 SCC 1, JNU started implementing the reservation policy to admit students of the OBC (Other backward Classes) in a phased manner. In this background, reference is made to the UGC (Minimum Standards and Procedure for Award of M.Phil./Ph.D. Degrees) Regulations, 2009 (hereafter “the 2009 regulations”) brought into force with effect from 1st June, 2009.
4. It is submitted that in wake of these developments, the Vice Chancellor of the JNU intimated that the impugned regulations, once notified were of mandatory nature and would be followed. On 4th November 2016, a committee known as the ‘Nafe committee’ was constituted by JNU on the basis of an analysis of the data received from different centres/schools which arrived at the conclusion that there existed discrimination in the admission process with reference to the viva-voce marks and therefore, recommended that the marks allocation should be revised and limited to only 15% of the total marks (for viva voce) and 85% weight-age to be given to written examination. On, 3rd February 2017, JNU released a press note concerning the minutes of meeting of th
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
