IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 06-02-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY T.J.S.Engineering College, Represented by its Principal Dr.J.Prakash, T.J.S. Nagar, Peruvoyal, Kavaraipettai, Near Redhills, Gummidipoondi Taluk, Tiruvallur District - 601 206.

..Petitioner Vs

1. Anna University, Represented by its Registrar, Sardar Patel Road, Chennai-600 025.

2. University Grants Commission (UGC)

Represented by its Secretary, Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi -110 002.

..Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the first respondent to scrupulously adhere to Regulation 4.2 of University Grants commission (Conferment of Autonomous Status upon Colleges and Measures for Maintenance of Standards in Autonomous College) Regulations 2023 and to forthwith notify the Autonomous Status granted to the petitioner college by the second Respondent vide its communication bearing No.F.2-10/2023 (AC-Policy) dated 27.05.2025, and in line with the common Judgment dated 02.09.2025 passed by this Court W.A.Nos.2514, 1778 and 1840 of 2025 and order dated 15.10.2025 passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in S.L.P.(C)Nos.29146 of 2025.

For Petitioner: Mrs.A.Arun Anbumani For Respondents: Mr.U.Baranidharan for R1 Ms.B.Rabu Manohar Senior Central Government Standing Counsel for R2

ORDER

The prayer in the writ petition is to direct the 1^st respondent herein to scrupulously adhere to Regulation 4.2 of University Grants Commission (Conferment of Autonomous Status upon Colleges and Measures for Maintenance of Standards in Autonomous College) Regulations 2023 and forthwith notify the Autonomous Status granted to the petitioner / College in the order of the University Grants Commission in No.F.2-10/2023 (AC-Policy) dated 27.05.2025 in line with the judgment in W.A.Nos.2514, 1778 and 1840 of 2025 dated 02.09.2025 and the order of the Supreme Court in S.L.P. (C)

Nos.29146 of 2025 dated 15.10.2025.

2. When the matter came up for hearing, it is submitted by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that in identical matters, orders were passed by this Court in W.P.No.35 of 2025 etc. Aggrieved thereby, the respondent University also filed W.A.No.2514 of 2025 and the Hon’ble Division Bench also confirmed the order passed in the writ petitions and dismissed the appeals.

3. As a matter of fact, the respondent University also filed S.L.P.No.29146 of 2025 and the same was also dismissed. As such, it can be seen that the matter is to be allowed on the same terms as in the order passed in Writ Petition No.35 of 2025. The relevant portion of the order passed in W.P.No.35 of 2025 etc., is extracted hereunder:

“5.The role of the parent University is stipulated in Regulation 4 of the UGC Regulations, 2023. The relevant portion of the Regulation 4.1 and 4.2 read as follows: “4.1 To examine the application of the College for autonomous status on the UGC portal and give its recommendations, along with reasons/justification, within 30 working days on the UGC portal. If the parent University does not respond on the UGC Portal within 30 working days, it shall be presumed that the parent University has no objection to the processing of the application by the UGC for conferment of autonomous status.

4.2 Issue notification within 30 days for a College to function as an autonomous entity once the autonomous status is conferred on the College by UGC.”

6. The learned counsel appearing for the UGC submitted that without considering the objections, the first respondent would not have passed orders conferring autonomous status to the petitioners. The learned counsel further submitted that in case objections were filed beyond 30 days, it could be presumed that the University had no objection under Regulation 4.1.

7.The submission of the learned counsel appearing for the UGC is recorded and in the light of the said submission and Regulation 4.2 of the UGC Regulation extracted a