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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 41496

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
M.DHANDAPANI, J
SHREE SATHYAM CHARITABLE TRUST – Appellant
Versus
University Grants Commission – Respondent



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr.D.Prabhu Mukunth Arunkumar
For the Respondents: Mr.B.Rabu Manohar, Mr.U.Baranidharan

Power to confer autonomous status rests with UGC. Universities must notify such status as per UGC Regulations.

Headnote:The petitioner, an educational institution, sought a direction to the Anna University to notify the autonomous status conferred by the UGC. The Court observed that the power to grant autonomous status lies with the UGC and that previous judgments have affirmed this position, which has been upheld by the Apex Court. The University was directed to act accordingly. The Court framed the issue of whether the Anna University is obligated to notify the autonomous status granted by the UGC, holding that it is bound to do so as per settled law and statutory regulations. The writ petition is disposed of directing the University to notify the autonomous status within four weeks.

Table of Content
1. petitioner seeks mandamus for autonomous status notification. (Para 1)
2. ugc has authority to grant autonomous status and courts uphold it. (Para 4 , 5 , 6)
3. university must notify autonomous status within four weeks. (Para 7)

ORDER

This Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking a direction to the 2nd respondent to notify autonomous status granted to the petitioner college by the 1st respondent vide order dated 20.02.2026 for a period of five years from 2026 – 2027 to 2030 – 2031 as per Clause 4.2 of the University Grants Commission (Conferment of Autonomous Status upon Colleges and Measures for Maintenance of Standards in Autonomous Colleges) Regulations, 2023 (in short ‘the Regulations’) forthwith.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Central Government Standing Counsel accepting notice for the 1st respondent and the learned Standing Counsel accepting notice for the 2nd respondent.

3. The case of the petitioner is as follows:

(i) Pursuant to the approval granted by the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) dated 03.08.2011 and the affiliation granted by the Anna University dated 09.08.2011, the petitioner college was started. It is now affiliated to the 2nd respondent. It has been functioning for more than 15 years continuously with the approval of the AICTE and the affiliation from the 2nd respondent from time to time. It has also been accredited by the National Assessment and Accreditation Council vide certificate of accreditation dated 27.02.2025. It has been included in the list of colleges by the 1st respondent under Section 2(f) of the University Grants Commission Act under the non- government college teaching upto Master’s degree vide order dated 25.07.2025.

(ii) Having the requisite infrastructural and instructional facilities as per Regulation 6 of the Regulations, the petitioner college submitted an application to the 1st respondent for conferment of autonomous status from the academic year 2026-27. The 1st respondent conferred autonomous status to the petitioner college vide order dated 20.02.2026 for a period of five years from 2026-2027 to 2030-2031 as per Clause 7.4 of the Regulations with a direction to the 2nd respondent to issue necessary notification within 30 days regarding the grant of autonomous status to the petitioner college based on the Regulations. A copy of the order conferring autonomous status to the petitioner college was also communicated to the 2nd respondent.

(iii) On receipt of the copy of the order dated 20.02.2026, the petitioner college sent a representation dated 21.02.2026 to the 2nd respondent to notify the conferment of autonomous status as per the orders of the 1st respondent. However, the 2nd respondent has not yet issued the relevant notification. Though law on this issue has already been settled, nothing was forthcoming. Hence the writ petition.

4. This Court has carefully considered the submissions of the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.

5. As rightly contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the law on this issue is well settled.

6. This Court, by order dated 28.10.2025 in W.P.No.40800 of 2025 held as follows:

“7. Insofar as the conferment of autonomous status is concerned, is is a power that has been conferred to UGC and this position of law has been confirmed by the Apex Court. Apart from that, this Court in a recent order in W.P.Nos.35, 38 and 39 of 2025 dated 05.02.2025 reiterated the said position. It was further confirmed in appeal in W.A.No.2514 of 2025 etc., batch dated 02.09.2025. It is brought to the notice of this Court that the order dated 02.09.2025 of Hon'ble Division Bench has been further confirmed by Hon'ble Apex Court by dismissing SLP that was filed by the second respondent on 15.10.2025. In the light of the above, the second respondent University have to necessarily notify the autonomous status of the petitioner College which has been pending fo

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