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

2023 Supreme(Del) 5828

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Satish Chandra Sharma, Sanjeev Narula, JJ.
Rahul Mahajan - Appellant
Versus
Ministry of Education & Ors. - Respondents
W.P.(C) 2807 of 2021, CM APPL. 8469 of 2021
Decided On : 27-09-2023

Advocates appeared:
Mr. Vikram Singh Kushwaha, Advocate, for the Petitioner.
Mr. Manoj Ranjan Sinha and Mr.Deepak Sain, Advocates, for the Respondents.

IMPORTANT POINT
The central legal point established in the judgment is the mandatory nature of the provisions of the UGC Act, particularly Section 22 regarding the right to confer degrees and Section 13 regarding inspection, and the UGC's obligation to ensure compliance with these provisions.

Headnote:

UGC - University Grants Commission Inaction - UGC Act, 1956, Section 22, Section 13 - The court discussed the inaction of the University Grants Commission (UGC) with respect to universities/institutions/colleges providing unspecified courses. The court highlighted the provisions of the UGC Act, 1956, particularly Section 22 regarding the right to confer degrees and Section 13 regarding inspection, and emphasized the mandatory nature of these provisions. The court directed the UGC to take appropriate necessary actions to ensure compliance with the provisions of the UGC Act, 1956.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner filed a PIL highlighting the inaction of the University Grants Commission (UGC) with respect to universities/institutions/colleges providing unspecified courses. The petitioner sought various reliefs, alleging that students were conferred with degrees not recognized by the UGC, leading to wastage of time, money, and effort.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that there was a lack of effective implementation of the rules and regulations by the UGC, leading to the conferment of degrees not specified by the UGC. The UGC was directed to take necessary actions to ensure compliance with the UGC Act, 1956.

Issues: The main issues included the inaction of the UGC, lack of effective implementation of rules and regulations, and conferment of degrees not specified by the UGC.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the mandatory nature of the provisions of the UGC Act, particularly Section 22 regarding the right to confer degrees and Section 13 regarding inspection. It held that the UGC must ensure compliance with these provisions.

Final Decision: The PIL was disposed of with the direction for the UGC to take appropriate necessary actions to ensure compliance with the provisions of the UGC Act, 1956.

JUDGMENT

Satish Chandra Sharma, C.J. - The present writ petition, in the nature of a Public Interest Litigation ("PIL") has been filed by the petitioner, highlighting the inaction of the University Grants Commission (hereinafter referred to as the "UGC") with respect to Universities/Institution/Colleges providing unspecified courses.

2. The petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs in the writ petition-

"a) Issue a Writ in the nature of mandamus directing the UGC to ensure compliance by all universities and deemed-to-be universities and colleges and institutes, with Notification dt. 05.07.2014 bearing no. NO. F. 5?013 (CPP-II) issued by the UGC and connected notifications to ensure uniformity in degree nomenclature; and

b) Issue a Writ in the nature of mandamus directing the UGC to ensure wide publication of consolidated list of specified degrees at least twice a year, prior to the commencement of each academic session; and

c) Issue a Writ in the nature of mandamus directing the UGC to maintain and publish a list of approved degrees for each registered university and deemed-to be university and college and institute on its website; and

d) Issue a Writ in the nature of mandamus directing the Respondents to conduct a process of normalization of nomenclature of already issued unspecified degrees to the equivalent approve nomenclature with directions to issuing universities and deemed-to-be universities and colleges and institutes to re-issue fresh, normalized degree certificates in terms of the specified degrees; and

e) The word "may" should be interpreted as "shall" in Section 13 of the UGC Act, 1956; and

f) Revise the amount of penalty of Rupees One Thousand Only provided in Section 24 of the UGC Act, 1956, to be commensurate with the nature and scope of the breach if any; and

g) Appoint an independent committee of retired judges to inquire into and fix accountability into the systemic failure, spanning the tenures of multiple UGC officials, that has resulted in large scale conferment of unspecified degrees; and

h) Pass any other similar Writ(s) or further orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of Justice, for which the petitioners are duty bound, shall ever pray."

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has filed the present petition on the basis of information received by filing multiple RTI applications to various universities/institutions/colleges, UGC, various ministries, seeking information about the specification of degrees.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that due to the lapses and inconsistencies in the laws, rules and regulations of the UGC and the lack of accountability of the respondents, students are conferred with degrees which are not recognized by the UGC. This creates a situation wherein students are led to waste their time, money and effort for a future that does not exist.

5. The facts of the case reveal that the UGC, with the approval of Central Government, published notification No. F. 5?013 (CPP-II) on 05.07.2014 pertaining to specification of degrees which specifies the nomenclature of degrees in the Gazette of India ("Notification"). The UGC in the above stated notification has also stated:

"3. No university shall confer a degree in violation of the provisions of this notification. It shall be mandatory for the universities to adhere to the approved nomenclature of degree(s) and ensure minimum standards of instructions before award of degree as hereinafter prescribed."

6. Thereafter, on 11.07.2014 the Secretary, UGC addressed a letter to the Vice Chancellor of all the Universities wherein it was clearly stated that Section 22 of the Universities Grants Commission Act, 1956 ("UGC Act, 1956") is mandatory and binding on all Universities, and that the Universities are to award the degree(s) only within the framework of the said provision.

7. Section 22 of the UGC Act, 1956 is reproduced below:

"22. Right to confer degrees-

(1) The right of conferring or

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

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