Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
S. A. Bobde, CJI., A.S. Bopanna, V. Ramasubramanian, JJ.
APJ ABDUL KALAM TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY & ANR. – APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
JAI BHARATH COLLEGE OF MANAGEMENT AND ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY & ORS. – RESPONDENT(S)
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 4016 OF 2020 (@ Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.11482 OF 2020)
Decided on : 10-12-2020
(A) APJ Abdul Kalam Technological University Act, 2015 – Sections 30(2), 60-66 read with Section 14 – Affiliation of a new B. Tech Course – As per Section 14(6), in absence of a Statute, it is Vice-Chancellor who has power to regulate any matter which is required to be regulated by Statutes or Regulations – It cannot be interpreted to mean that Syndicate itself will be powerless in absence of Statutes and that Vice Chancellor will have power – There is nothing in Statutes issued on 07.08.2020 that appears to curtail power of Syndicate to lay down norms and standards – When Statutes have not prescribed any conditions for affiliation but have left it to Syndicate to take care of matters relating to affiliation, function of Syndicate to lay down norms and standards by virtue of powers conferred by Section 30(2), is made free of any fetters – Norms which Colleges have objected to, merely seek to ensure that at least 50% of outgoing students had passed their respective courses and that Institution should have most recent academic audit overall score of “Good”, apart from having actual intake of more than 50% of sanctioned intake in preceding three years on an average – High Court was in error in holding on first issue that resolutions passed by Syndicate prescribing norms and standards for grant of affiliation for additional courses, are ultra vires the Act. [APJ Abdul Kalam Technological University Act, 2015 – Sections 30(2), 60-66 read with Section 14] (Paras 36, 37, 38 and 39)
(B) Education – Affiliation of a new B. Tech Course – Role of appellant-University vis-à-vis AICTE – While it is not open to Universities to dilute norms and standards prescribed by AICTE, it is always open to Universities to prescribe enhanced norms – AICTE is not a super power with a devastating role undermining status, authority and autonomous functioning of Universities in areas and spheres assigned to them – Even State Government can prescribe higher standards than those prescribed by AICTE – Though AICTE has reserved to itself power to conduct inspections and take penal action against colleges for false declarations, such penal action does not mean anything and does not serve any purpose for students who get admitted to colleges which have necessary infrastructure only on paper and not on site – Regulations of AICTE are silent as to how students will get compensated, when penal action is taken against colleges which host false information online in their applications to AICTE – Ultimately, it is universities which are obliged to issue degrees and whose reputation is inextricably intertwined with fate and performance of students, that may have to face music and their role cannot be belittled – Today, even universities are being ranked according to quality of standards maintained by them – No State run university can afford to have a laidback attitude today, when their own performance is being measured by international standards – Power of universities to prescribe enhanced norms and standards, cannot be doubted – Impugned judgment of High Court set aside – Resolution passed by Syndicate on 24.06.2020 in modification of earlier resolution dated 04.02.2020 upheld – As a corollary, consequential actions University as regards first respondent-College also upheld – Applications for impleadment/intervention dismissed and other pending applications disposed of. (Paras 47, 48, 58 and 60)
Facts of the Case:
First respondent is a self-financing Institution which was earlier offering B. Tech courses in five disciplines with an annual permitted intake of 60 students in each of the disciplines. Aggrieved by the order passed by the Division Bench of Kerala High Court directing the Vice Chancellor of the University to reconsider the application for affiliation of a new B. Tech course, submitted by the first respondent, which is a self-financing Engineering College, solely on the basis of the extension of approval granted by the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE), APJ Abdul Kalam Technological University, which is a State University and its Vice Chancellor have come up with this appeal.
Findings of Court:
View taken by the Kerala High Court in paragraphs 33 to 35 of the impugned judgment on issue no.2, is unsustainable. At the cost of repetition, we point out that while universities cannot dilute the standards prescribed by AICTE, they certainly have power to stipulate enhanced norms and standards.
Result : Appeal allowed.
JUDGMENT
V. Ramasubramanian, J.
Leave granted.
2. Aggrieved by the order passed by the Division Bench of the Kerala High Court directing the Vice Chancellor of the University to reconsider the application for affiliation of a new B.Tech course, submitted by the first respondent, which is a self-financing Engineering College, solely on the basis of the extension of approval granted by the All India Council for Technical Education (hereinafter referred to as "AICTE"), the APJ Abdul Kalam Technological University, which is a State University and its Vice Chancellor have come up with this appeal.
3. We have heard Mr. Chander Uday Singh, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant-University, Mr. S. Krishnamoorthy, learned Counsel appearing for the first respondent-College, Ms. Priyanka Prakash, learned Counsel appearing for the second respondent-State and Mr. Anil Soni, learned Counsel appearing for the third respondent-AICTE. We have also heard Mr. C. Arayama Sundaram, Mr. Gopal Sankaranarayanan and Mr. P.S. Narasimha, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the applicants seeking intervention/impleadment and vacation of stay.
4. It appears that despite the mushroom growth of the self-financing Engineering Institutions in the neighbouring States, the State of Kerala had only 15 Engineering Colleges with an annual intake of only 4844 students till the year 1997. But in the past more than two decades, there was a spurt in the growth of self-financing Engineering Institutions in the State. The position as on date is that there are 149 Engineering Colleges in the State of Kerala with a total annual permitted intake of 47,420 seats.
5. In addition, there are also six Central Government Engineering Institutions in the State.
6. Therefore, with a view to regulate technical education in the State, the State of Kerala enacted the APJ Abdul Kalam Technological University Act, 2015 (hereinafter referred to as "the University Act"). Some of the Objects of the University as indicated in Section 5 of the Act are as follows:-
xxxx
(b) to improve the academic standards of the graduate, postgraduate and research programmes in engineering sciences, technology and management.
(c) to ensure the academic standards of all colleges and institutions affiliated to the University.
xxxxx
(k) to substantially increase enrolment in Postgraduate education and research programmes in the colleges and institutions with the aim of promoting engineering research, development and innovation;
(l) to support the establishment of Centres of excellence for multidisciplinary applied research in specific thematic areas;
(m) to improve the learning skills of the students by constantly and continuously improving and upgrading the academic quality and standards of faculty;
(n) to introduce and sustain innovative systematic quality improvement programmes in the field of technical education."
7. The powers and functions of the University enlisted in Section 8 include the following:
"xxxxxxx
(iii) to lay down the norms and standards for the establishment, maintenance, administration, supervision and recognition of colleges and centres maintained by the University.
(iv) to affiliate to itself institutions as constituent colleges or autonomous colleges or regular colleges or colleges with academic autonomy in accordance with the provisions of this Act and the Statutes, Ordinances and Regulations and to withdraw affiliation of colleges obtained in violation of Statutes of the University.;
(v) to confer academic autonomy to affiliated colleges, institutions or a department of the affiliated colleges or institutions or a department maintained by the University.
xxxxxxxx
(vii) to hold examinations and to confer degrees, postgraduate degrees, diplomas, certificates and other academic distinctions to persons who, -
(a) shall have pursued a prescribed course of study in the University or any college or institutions thereunder and shall have passed the prescribed examinations of the University unle
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
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
