Page 1

1

Non-Reportable

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.142 OF 2006

Viplav Sharma                                           … Petitioner

Versus

Union of India and others                         …  

Respondents

WITH

WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.349 OF 2009  

WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NOs.30, 152, 156, 177, 191,  194 and 217  OF 2010  

AND

WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.119 OF 2011

O R D E R

K.S. Radhakrishnan, J.

1. Dr. Rajeev Dhawan, learned senior counsel appearing  

for some of the Deemed Universities, raised a preliminary  

objection  in  accepting  the  Prof.  Tandon’s  report,  which

Page 2

2

recommended de-notifying the Deemed University status  

to 44 institutions. Learned senior counsel submitted that  

none  of  the  procedures  enumerated  in  the  draft  2008  

Regulations  or  2010  Regulations,  or  the  statutory  

procedures laid down in the UGC Act, have been followed  

by the Committee.  Learned senior counsel also submitted  

that  under  the  UGC  Act,  no  power  is  conferred  on  the  

Central  Government  to  constitute  such  a  Committee,  

overlooking the Universities Grant Commission.

2. Learned senior counsel also pointed out that the UGC  

itself  had examined the question about de-notifying the  

University status given to various institutions and found  

only  two institutions lacked the necessary requirements  

and  recommended  de-notification.    Learned  senior  

counsel  also pointed out  various other infirmities in  the  

Prof. Tandon’s report and submitted that the report has to  

be discarded.   

3. Shri  K.K.  Venugopal,  learned  senior  counsel  also  

submitted  that,  between  2009  and  2014,  many  of  the  

Deemed  Universities  have  rectified  the  deficiencies

Page 3

3

pointed out  by the Tandon Committee Report  and UGC  

may be directed to conduct a fresh exercise and advise  

Central Government accordingly.   Shri  Mukul  Rohtagi,  

learned senior counsel urged that most of the institutions  

have complied with the statutory requirements laid down  

under the Medical Council of India Act, Dental Council of  

India Act, and so on.    Shri Vikas Singh, learned senior  

counsel  also  submitted  that  UGC  may  be  directed  to  

consider the matter afresh, uninfluenced by the findings  

recorded by the Tandon Committee Report as well as the  

Report of the Committee of Officers.

4. Ms.  Indira  Jaising,  learned  Additional  Solicitor  

General,  submitted that, in view of the status-quo order  

passed by this Court, no final decision has been taken by  

the Central Government, either on the basis of the report  

of the UGC or Prof. Tandon’s report, affirmed by the report  

of the Committee of Officers.  Learned ASG also submitted  

that the Tandon Committee has examined the status and  

the functioning of the various institutions on the basis of  

laid  down parameters  and  found  that  those  institutions

Page 4

4

have not satisfied any of those parameters.  The Tandon  

Committee, it was stated, has categorized the institutions  

as ‘A’, ‘B’ and ‘C’ and it is only the institutions included in  

‘C’ category which lacked the requirements laid down for  

conferring  the  Deemed  University  status,  both  on  past  

performance and also promise for the future.   Learned  

ASG also submitted that the Union of India would welcome  

the  advice  of  the  UGC  in  this  regard  on  the  materials  

already  on  record,  including  the  Tandon  Committee  

Report.    Learned  ASG  also  submitted  that  no  further  

hearing is contemplated by the UGC Act before tendering  

its advice to the Union of India.   

5. Shri  Rakesh  Dwivedi,  learned  senior  counsel  

appearing for the UGC, submitted that the Prof. Tandon’s  

report  is  yet  to  be  placed before  the UGC,  so  also  the  

report  of  the  Committee  of  Officers.   Learned  senior  

counsel also submitted that the UGC will examine all the  

reports  and  the  objections,  if  any,  raised  by  the  

institutions against the Tandon Committee Report.  UGC  

has also no objection to ascertain the present status of the

Page 5

5

institutions  before  tendering  its  advice  to  the  Central  

Government.

6. The UGC Act has been enacted to make provisions  

for  the  coordination  and  determination  of  standards  in  

Universities.    For  that  purpose,  it  has  established  the  

UGC.  Under Section 3, power has been conferred on the  

Central Government, on the advice of the Commission, to  

declare any institution for higher education as a Deemed  

University, for the purpose of the Act. In exercise of the  

powers conferred under Section 3,  the University status  

has been given to the various institutions.

7. At  this  moment,  we  are  only  concerned  with  the  

legality  of  the continuance of  Deemed University  status  

with respect to 44 institutions.  With regard to the status  

of  those  institutions,  it  is  seen,  there  is  some  conflict  

between the report prepared by the UGC as well as that of  

Prof. Tandon.   

8. Regulation  22  of  UGC  (Institutions  Deemed  to  be  

Universities)  Regulations,  2010  deals  with  the

Page 6

6

consequences of  violation of regulations.     Regulations  

22.1 enables the Central Government and the Commission  

to cause an inspection of the institutions deemed to be  

university,  or  inspection  in  matter  of  the  institution  

deemed  to  be  university.  We  have  now  two  parallel  

inquiries, one conducted by the UGC directly and another  

conducted  by  the  Central  Government  through  Prof.  

Tandon.  But we find that UGC had no occasion to examine  

the  Prof.  Tandon  Committee  report.   Further,  we  also  

notice that there is  another report of the Committee of  

Officers, which has also not been placed before the UGC.    

9. Under such circumstances, we feel it appropriate to  

give a direction to the UGC to examine all the reports, with  

notice to all the 44 institutions concerned.  Institutions are  

free to raise their objections against the reports and the  

UGC has to consider the same and take an independent  

decision  in  accordance  with  law,  if  necessary,  after  

affording a hearing, within a period of two months from  

today.  UGC has then to tender its advice to the Central  

Government  with  its  report.    Needless  to  say that  the

Page 7

7

advice of the UGC is not binding on the Union of India but  

has to be given due weight since the UGC is an expert  

statutory authority.   

10. We make it clear that we have not given our stamp of  

approval  to any of  the reports and it  is  for  the UGC to  

consider all the reports, with notice to the 44 institutions,  

in accordance with law.     

…..………………………J. (K.S. Radhakrishnan)

………………………….J. (Vikramajit Sen)

New Delhi, January 21, 2014.