1

REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

ORIGINAL WRIT JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION (CIVIL)No. 905 OF 2018

Jai Singh and Ors. …Petitioners

Versus

University Grants Commission and Ors. …Respondents

J U D G M  E N T

Uday Umesh Lalit, J.

1. Seven petitioners who had enrolled themselves in the years 2004 and 2005

in  courses  leading  to  award  of  Degree  in  Engineering  through  Open  Distance

Learning by respondent No.4 - Janardan Rai Nagar Rajasthan Vidyapeeth (deemed

to be University), have filed the present Writ Petition seeking following reliefs:

i) Issue a writ of Mandamus or any other suitable Writ directing the Respondents more particularly the Respondent No.2/AICTE to issue a  clarification that  the degree in technical  education granted to the petitioners herein by the Respondent Universities through  Open  & Distance  Learning  Mode  are  valid,  do  not require  AICTE  approval,  and  will  be  treated  at  par  with corresponding  Degrees  granted  by  any  traditional University/AICTE recognized Institution in the Country.

2

ii) Issue  a  Writ  in  the  nature  of  Mandamus  or  any  other Writ/Direction/Order,  commanding  the  respondents  and  their men, agents and servants not to declare the technical degrees obtained  by  the  Writ  Petitioners  as  well  as  similarly circumstanced persons as null.

iii) Issue  a  Writ  in  the  nature  of  Mandamus  or  any  other Writ/Direction/Order,  declaring  the  degrees  obtained  through distance education mode or off campus mode to be valid for all purposes.

iv) Issue  a  Writ  in  the  nature  of  Certiorari  or  any  other Writ/Direction/Order,  quashing  all  steps  taken  by  the Respondents No. 1 to 7 and their men, agents and servants for declaring any degree granted and/or obtained through distance education  mode  as  illegal  and  consequentially  declare  such steps as illegal.

v) Issue  a  Writ  in  the  nature  of  Certiorari  or  any  other Writ/Direction/ Order, calling upon the Respondents to certify and produce all necessary records relating to the present case and on perusal thereof quash and/or set aside and/or declare the same to be illegal.

vi) Grant an ex-party, ad-interim injunction against the respondents restraining the respondents to give effect to directions contained in  Paras  66-66.13  of  (2018)  1  SCC  468  titled  Orissa  Lift Irrigation Corporation Limited  Vs.  Rabi Shankar Patro and Ors. till the final adjudication of the present Writ Petition.

2. The controversy in question including the issue whether a Deemed to be

University, without there being any approval from the AICTE, could start courses

leading to award of Degrees in Engineering through Open Distance Learning came

up  for  consideration  before  this  Court  in  Orissa  Lift  Irrigation  Corporation

3

Limited  vs.  Rabi Shankar 1Patro and Ors.  While rejecting the submission that

the  Deemed  to  be  Universities  were  also  entitled  to  similar  protection  as  was

accorded to  State  or  Central  Universities  in  terms of  decision  of  this  Court  in

Bharathidasan  University  and  anr.   vs.   All  India  Council  for  Technical

Education and Ors.2, following directions were issued by this Court in Para 66 of

its judgment in Orissa Lift Irrigation (supra):

“66. Accordingly, we direct:

66.1. The  1994  AICTE  Regulations,  do  apply  to  deemed  to  be universities and the deemed to be universities in the present matter were  not  justified  in  introducing  any  new  courses  in  technical education without the approval of AICTE.

66.2. Insofar as candidates enrolled during the academic sessions 2001-2005, in the present case the ex post facto approvals granted by UGC and their authorities concerned are set aside.

66.3. Consequent  to  aforesaid  Direction  II,  all  the  degrees  in Engineering awarded by deemed to be universities concerned stand suspended.

66.4. AICTE shall devise the modalities to conduct an appropriate test(s) as indicated in para 58 above. The option be given to the students concerned whose degrees stand suspended by 15-1-2018 to appear  at  the  test(s)  to  be  conducted  in  accordance  with  the directions in para 58 above. Students be given not more than two chances to  clear  test(s)  and if  they do not  successfully clear  the test(s) within the stipulated time, their degrees shall stand cancelled and all the advantages shall stand withdrawn as stated in paras 57 and 58 above. The entire expenditure for conducting the test(s) shall

1 (2018)1 SCC 468 2 (2001)8 SCC 676

4

be recovered from the deemed to be universities concerned by 31-3- 2018.

66.5. Those students who do not wish to exercise the option, shall be refunded entire money deposited by them towards tuition fee and other  charges  within  one  month  of  the  exercise  of  such  option. Needless  to  say,  their  degrees  shall  stand  cancelled  and  all advantages/benefits shall stand withdrawn as mentioned in para 58.

66.6. If the students clear the test(s) within the stipulated time, all the advantages/benefits shall be restored to them and their degrees will stand revived fully.

66.7. As regards students  who were admitted after  the academic sessions 2001-2005, their degrees in Engineering awarded by the deemed  to  be  universities  concerned  through  distance  education mode  stand  recalled  and  be  treated  as  cancelled.  All  benefits secured by such candidates shall stand withdrawn as indicated in para 59 above. However, the entire amount paid by such students to the deemed to be universities concerned towards tuition fees and other expenditure shall be returned by the deemed to be universities concerned by 31-5-2018, as indicated in para 59.

66.8. By 31-5-2018 all  the  deemed to  be  universities  concerned shall  refund  the  sums  indicated  above  in  para  66.7  and  an appropriate affidavit to that extent shall be filed with UGC within a week thereafter.

66.9. We direct  CBI to carry out  thorough investigation into the conduct of the officials concerned who dealt with the matters and went about granting  permissions against the policy statement, as indicated in para 60 above and into the conduct of institutions who  abused  their  position  to  advance  their  commercial  interest illegally. Appropriate steps can thereafter be taken after culmination of such investigation.

66.10. UGC shall also consider whether the deemed to be university status  enjoyed  by  JRN,  AAI,  IASE  and  VMRF  calls  for  any

5

withdrawal and conduct an inquiry in that behalf by 30-6-2018 as indicated above. If the moneys, as directed above, are not refunded to the students concerned, that factor shall  be taken into account while conducting such exercise.

66.11. We restrain all  deemed to be universities  to  carry on any courses  in  distance  education  mode  from  the  academic  session 2018-2019 onwards unless and until  it  is  permissible  to conduct such courses in distance education mode and specific permissions are  granted  by  the  statutory/regulatory  authorities  concerned  in respect  of  each  of  those  courses  and  unless  the  off-campus centres/study centres are individually inspected and found adequate by the statutory authorities  concerned.  The approvals  have to  be course specific.

66.12. UGC  is  further  directed  to  take  appropriate  steps  and implement Section 23 of the UGC Act and restrain deemed to be universities  from using  the  word  “university”  within  one  month from today.

66.13. The  Union  of  India  may  constitute  a  three-member Committee  comprising  of  eminent  persons  who  have  held  high positions in the field of education, investigation, administration or law  at  national  level  within  one  month.  The  Committee  may examine  the  issues  indicated  above and  suggest  a  road  map  for strengthening and setting up of oversight and regulatory mechanism in the relevant field of higher education and allied issues within six months. The Committee may also suggest oversight mechanism to regulate  the deemed to be universities.  The Union of  India  may examine the said report and take such action as may be considered appropriate within one month thereafter and file an affidavit in this Court of the action taken on or before 31-8-2018. The matter shall be placed for consideration of this aspect on 11-9-2018.”

6

3. The present  petitioners having enrolled themselves in 2004 and 2005 are

covered by directions 66.4 and 66.7.  It was stated at the bar that they did appear at

the examination so conducted by the AICTE.

4. It was, however, submitted by Mr. Soli J. Sorabjee, learned senior advocate

on behalf of the petitioners, inter alia, that the case of the petitioners was covered

by one time exception granted by this Court  in the case of  Jawaharlal Nehru

Technological  University   vs.   The  Chairman  and  Managing  Director,

Transmission Corporation of Telangana Ltd. & Ors.3 decided on 10th April, 2018.

Para 2 of said decision dated 10th April, 2018 had quoted the earlier order dated 16th

February,  2018  passed  in  said  matter  which  brings  out  the  factual  distinction.

Relevant part of said para 2 was as under:

“On 16.02.2018 the following order was passed:

‘Permission  to  file  the  special  leave  petition  is granted.

Learned  Attorney  General  has  pointed  out  that  in view  of  the  judgment  of  this  Court  in  “Bharathidasan University  & Anr.   vs.   All  India  Council  for  Technical Education & Ors.”, (2001)8 SCC 676, no prior approval of the All India Council for the Technical Education (AICTE) is  required  by  the  petitioner  –  University  for  starting engineering courses.

The petitioner-University is a State University and it gave  admissions  in  transparent  manner  only  to  the Government Employees.  There was a contact programme and faculty was available.  Practical work also held.  DEC

3 Civil Appeal No. 3697-3698 of 2018

7

gave ex-post facto approval.  The standards have not been compromised.  ……….”

5. Jawaharlal  Nehru  Technological  University  being  a  State  University  was

completely covered by the decision of this Court in Bharathidasan (supra) and as

such  reliance  on  the  decision  in  Jawaharlal  Nehru  Technological  University

(supra) case would not be of any assistance to the petitioners.  Mr. Sorabjee learned

senior  advocate  further  relied  upon  certain  documents  including  ex-post  facto

approvals which aspects have already been noticed and dealt with in the judgment

of this Court in Orissa Lift Irrigation (supra).   We, therefore, see no reason to take

a different view in the matter.  The present petition is completely covered by the

decision of this Court in Orissa Lift Irrigation (supra) and not by the decision of

this Court in Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University (supra).

6. This petition, thus, is devoid of any merits and is dismissed.  

…………………..……J. (Abhay Manohar Sapre)

…………………..……J. (Uday Umesh Lalit)

New Delhi; September 24, 2018.