Education Alert - June –
2013
A. High Court Cases
1. Indian Institute of Planning and Management v. All
India Council for Technical Education, decided on May 30, 2013 by the High Court of Delhi.
Facts:
A writ petition was filed by the Indian
Institute of Planning & Management (“IIPM”)
seeking appropriate writ remedy against the order of AICTE by which IIPM was
included in the list of unapproved institutions running technical programme
without AICTE approval. IIPM relied on the judgment of the Supreme Court in the
case of Association of Management of
Private Colleges v. All India Council
for Technical Education where the court held that MBA was not technical education.
Ruling and Order:
The Court held that in view of the judgment of
the Supreme Court in the case of Association
of Management of Private Colleges,
AICTE is not concerned with the courses run by the IIPM and AICTE would have no
jurisdiction over the petitioner college.
2. Monalisa Das v. State of West
Bengal, decided on June 04,
2013 by the High Court of Calcutta.
Facts:
The three petitioners had applied for admission
to the post graduate degree course in modern medicine under open category seats
for the session 2012-13. The three petitioners participated in the second round
of counselling but they did not get their desired subjects and institution.
They came to know that six post graduate seats were excluded in the second
round of counselling. They made a representation on March 12, 2013 for holding an
extended second round of counselling to fill up the vacant seats along with
other candidates. The respondent indicated that the second round of counselling
would be held on March 21 and 22, 2013 for ‘in service’ candidates only. Hence
a writ was filed in the nature of mandamus to direct the respondents to relax
the time schedule for holding the extended second counselling for the open
category candidates. The petitioners contended that the deviation from the
Medical Council of India (“MCI”)
schedule has been found to be permissible under extraordinary circumstances, and
primarily relied on the judgment of the Delhi High Court dated March 7, 2013 in
writ petition no. 24431(W) of 2012. The respondent, on the other hand,
contended that MCI has set up cut-off dates for open category as May 31, 2012
for the session 2012-13 and the education in respect of those post graduate
students who were admitted under the open category has proceeded for a
considerable extent and that MCI schedule must be followed. The cut-off dates
are mandatory and only in exceptional cases, deviations are permitted.
Ruling and Order:
The petition was dismissed on the ground that
the instant case did not fall under the extraordinary circumstances to make a
deviation. The Court further held that the deviation in the case relied on by
the petitioners, was made because as many as 62 seats had remained vacant. Moreover,
the petitioners had participated in the second round of counselling and their
ranks were not on the top of the waiting list.
3. Vijayanagara Collage of Education v. The
Coordinator Task Force on Teachers Education Bangalore University, decided on June 05, 2013 by the High Court of
Karnataka.
Facts:
The petitioner college had started the B.Ed.
Course in 2004 with the recognition of the National Council for Teacher
Education (“NCTE”). When the College
was shifted to the new premises on 28.11.2007 the NCTE conducted the inspection
on 26.10.2010 and passed an order dated 6.5.2011 withdrawing the recognition
with effect from the academic year 2011-12. The Karnataka High Court had
quashed the order of de-recognition passed by the NCTE and directed the NCTE to
reconsider the petitioner's representation. In the interim, the task force recommended
that the affiliation of the petition college should not be renewed for the
academic year 2012 – 13. The present petition was filed challenging the order
passed by the Bangalore University pursuant to this recommendation.
Ruling and Order:
The Court held that the admissions of students
were stated between September and November 2012 i.e., after the granting of the
interim order of stay for the de-recognition orders passed by NCTE. Therefore,
during the material period during which the admissions came to be made, there
was no de-recognition order. By the posterior decision of de-recognition, the
anterior admissions cannot be invalidated. The court held that the Bangalore
University's impugned order was issued on February 28, 2013, long after the
commencement of the academic year 2012-13. The Court approved of the admissions
of the respondent students for the academic year 2012-13. The Court further
directed Bangalore University to consider the petitioner's case for the renewal
of affiliation and directed the petitioner institution not to admit any student
for the B.Ed. Course for the academic year 2013-14 without obtaining the order
of stay/setting aside/quashing of the NCTE's orders de- recognizing the
petitioner institution.
4. The Regional Officer, All India Council for
Technical Education v. Jind Institute of Engineering and
Technology, decided on June
06, 2013 by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh
Facts:
The respondent-institute had submitted an
application for getting approval from the AICTE for the academic session
2013-14. The AICTE responded to the application by stating that the same had to
be filed under Chapter I of the Approval Process Handbook (“Handbook”) for the Session 2013-14 and also
online. The respondent-institute contended that an application under Chapter I
of the Approval Process Handbook related only to institutes where a fresh
approval is sought for and did not regulate approvals sought by institutes who
already had been granted approval during any prior time. The Court directed the
respondent-institute to submit an application afresh under Chapter I of the
Handbook. The appellants filed a writ petition against the order in the High
Court. It was contended that if an application was submitted by the
respondent-institute by April 10, 2013, the same would be processed in the
light of Chapter I of the Approval Process Handbook and a final order for the
academic session 2013-14 would be passed within a period of 15 days thereafter.
However, subsequently an application was moved by the appellants to withdraw this
stand Ruling and Order:
The Court observed that the conduct of the
appellants and the stand taken can at best be termed to be ‘audacious’. The
Court referring to the judgement in Parshvanath
Charitable Trust and others v. All
India Council for Technical Education case
observed that the decision in the aforementioned case of the Supreme Court
calling upon AICTE to ensure proper and timely action upon the application
submitted to it would also apply to the present case. The appellants had delayed
the decision on the application of the respondent-institute and had kept it in
abeyance.
The Court further held that the fault lay with
the appellants as they were trying to subvert the whole process including the
directions of the Supreme Court. The Court dismissed the appeal.
5. St. Stephens Teachers College v. State
of Karnataka, Bangalore University, The Registrar, Bangalore University and The
Registrar (Evaluation),
decided on June 06, 2013 by the High Court of Karnataka, Bangalore.
Facts:
The petitioner filed a petition seeking a writ
of mandamus directing the respondents to consider and grant affiliation to the
petitioner's B.Ed course. The petitioner college started the B.Ed. course in
2005-06 by obtaining the permission from the National Council for Teacher
Education (“NCTE”) and obtained
affiliation from the Bangalore University. It did not admit any students in
2010-11 and applied for renewal of affiliation to the Bangalore University for
2011-12. However, the same was not disposed off despite there being a court
order to do so. The college applied again for the academic year 2012-13 but
again there was inaction from the Bangalore University. The petitioner
contended that that the NCTE recognition had not been withdrawn and the
directions issued by the Government vide its letter, dated March 13, 2013 are
binding on the Bangalore University as per Section 59(12) of the Karnataka State
Universities Act, 2000.
Ruling and Order:
The Court examined the letter dated March 13,
2013 and concluded that the author of the letter had proceeded on the footing
that the petitioner college had been given the affiliation for the academic
year 2011-12. The Court observed that the said letter was issued either in
ignorance of the facts or without application of mind.
The court held that the recognition granted by
NCTE was not withdrawn. Hence, the petitioner college enjoyed the status of a
recognized college and its application for the affiliation was pending
consideration. The Court passed an order inter
alia directing the respondents to take decision in the matter of the grant
of affiliation for the petitioner college within an outer limit of three weeks
from the date of the issuance of the certified copy of the court’s order.
6. Dhaya College of Engineering v. the
Secretary to Government, decided
on June 07, 2013 by the High Court of Madras.
Facts:
The petitioner filed a writ petition challenging
the order of the Registrar of Anna University by which the university declined
affiliation to the college. Through a writ of certiorari the college sought for
records on the basis of which the Registrar passed the impugned order. In a
series of litigations between the college authorities and the university, the
Division Bench of the Madras High Court had previously asked the university
authorities to inspect and figure out whether the college had rectified all the
defects that pointed out.
Ruling and Order:
The court observed that the university from 2011
onwards, under the guise of exercising powers of inspection and verification as
per the affiliation norms, had been rejecting the application for provisional
affiliation. The Court held that the division bench had directed the university
to consider only the deficiencies that were stated to have been rectified and
it should not have gone beyond that. The Court issued a writ of mandamus
directing Anna University to grant provisional affiliation to the petitioner
college forthwith for the academic year 2013-14 and also a counselling code in
order to enable the college to participate in counselling and admit students in
five different streams. Further, the Registrar of the University was directed
to pay a cost of Rs. 25,000.
B.
REGULATIONS
1. University Grants Commission
1.1 UGC Public Notice on Courses/Study Centres and Territorial Jurisdiction
of Universities, dated June 24, 2013.
University Grant Commission (“UGC”) has issued a public notice on
study centres of various universities. The notice inter alia clarified that a university established by a State Act
shall only operate within the territorial jurisdiction as stated under its Act.
The notice further clarified that private universities or deemed universities
cannot affiliate any college or institution for conducting courses leading to
award of its diplomas, degrees or other qualification. The UGC also informed
that M.Phil/Ph.D courses cannot run under distant mode.
1.2 UGC Notification dated June 17, 2013
The UGC has issued a notification on
June 17, 2013 stating that the commission in exercise of its powers conferred
under section 12 of the UGC Act, 1956, has adopted the “Guidelines for DEC
Minimum Requirement for Recognition of ODL Institutions”. These guidelines were
issued by DEC under the repealed Statute 28 of the IGNOU Act, 1985. UGC further
notified that this notification shall cease to be in force with effect from the
date of coming into force of the UGC regulations on the subject matter.
C.
NEWS
1.
Karnataka High Court
seeks report on RTE from state
Due to concern over
the implementation of Right to Education Act, the High Court directed the state
government to file a compliance report on its implementation and facilities
that are being provided to underprivileged children. The bench ordered the
government to make suggestions to influence parents to send children back to
school and reduce dropout rate. The report has to be completed within a week.
2.
Higher Education: UGC
for increasing fellowships, reservations
UGC, concerned over
the gaps in the higher education system, will undertake measures to bridge
them. These measures include increased number of fellowships, reservations and
financial assistance to girls. UGC
Chairman Ved Prakash said, “We will take measure such as financial assistance,
increase the number of fellowships, open disciplines in certain parts of the
country, and incentivise the public institutions for those programmes or even
make reservations.”
3. Nursery schools
need recognition too: HC
The
Madras High Court stated that as per law, every educational institution,
including a pre-primary school, should obtain recognition and if a plea that no
recognition is required for nursery schools is accepted, then there would be several
such schools without any kind of control. It was decided that obtaining
recognition under RTE Act would apply even to nursery schools.
4. CBSE guidelines stress on inclusive
education
CBSE deputy secretary, UC Bodh, has
written a letter to schools warning them that they would be held responsible if
textbooks being used by them are off the mark. If any books have objectionable
content, then “the school will have to take responsibility of such content”.
Further, the board has laid down guidelines that schools must follow while
prescribing textbooks such as they must be ethically, culturally, and
constitutionally valid, and schools must verify that the book is based on
principles of child-centered education, activity based learning, etc.
5. CBSE UID must to participate
in interschool sports
CBSE has now made it mandatory for every student to
have their own Unique Identity Number if they wish to participate in
interschool sports competition. Schools will print the UID card which will have
the student’s photograph, and it will be attested with principal’s signature.
The decision is part of a broader set of initiatives taken by the board’s
sports department in an effort to streamline its operations. The UID is a
generic one which allows students to participate in every competition organized
by the board across the country.
6.
Maharashtra Government’s
resolution for the establishment of private universities (self- financed universities)
After withdrawal of the Maharashtra Self Financed
Universities (Establishment & Regulation) Bill, 2011 (“Bill”), the
Maharashtra government has issued a resolution to convert the proposal received
for self-financed universities by a developer into a Bill and seek the approval
of legislature. As per the resolution, a promoter will have to submit a
proposal to the state government to set up a private university. The proposal
would then be scrutinised and if the proposal is cleared, the government will
issue a letter of intent. After that the promoter will have to give a detailed
proposal to the government, which will be treated as a bill to set up a private
university. The proposed private universities would have to keep 50%
reservation for women, low income groups and those domiciled in Maharashtra.
The land requirements for self-financed universities have also been
substantially reduced as compared to the earlier Bill.
*******************************************
DISCLAMER
This
newsletter is being provided to the recipient solely for the purpose of
his/her/its information. It is meant to be merely an informative summary and
should not be treated as a substitute for considered legal advice. This update
covers significant legal developments in the field of higher and school
education in India during the month of June, 2013, including judgments, laws
and notifications issued by courts and the regulatory bodies, as applicable. If
you wish to receive more information about any content of this newsletter,
please feel free to contact:
Sarthak Advocates & Solicitors
A – 35, Sector – 2, NOIDA 201 301
T: +91 120 430 9050
E: mani.gupta@sarthaklaw.com
No comments:
Post a Comment