Listen to this articlePraneeth K And Ors. v.
University Grants Commission (UGC) And Ors.
Writ
Petition (Civil) No.724 of 2020. decided on 28.08.2020.
https://main.sci.gov.in/supremecourt/2020/15106/15106_2020_35_1501_23651_Judgement_28-Aug-2020.pdf
Bench: Ashok Bhushan, R. Subhash Reddy, M.R
Shah, JJ.
Facts:
Several
writ petitions were filed in the Supreme Court under Article 32 of the
Constitution of India wherein the petitioners challenged the directions issued
by the University Grants Commission (UGC) on 06.07.2020 wherein it was mandated
to all the universities and colleges across India to hold final semester
examinations by 30.09.2020. Also, the petitioners sought relief to direct the
respondents to declare the results of final year students on the basis of their
past performance/ internal assessment and to award mark sheets and degrees.
Issue:
Whether
the guidelines issued by UGC dated 06.07.2020 which require the Universities to
complete final year examinations by 30.09.2020 are beyond the domain of UGC?
And are the guidelines only advisory in nature?
Held:
The
Supreme Court held that the guidelines issued by UGC are not beyond its domain
as they related to “co-ordination and determination of standard in institutions
of higher education” which is mentioned in Entry 66 of List I of the
Constitution. The UGC Act has been enacted on the basis of this entry.
The
court also held that the guidelines issued by UGC are not advisory in nature,
they have statutory force and have been issued by invoking the powers given to
UGC under Section 12 of the UGC Act. Section 12 of the Act provides that it
shall be the general duty of the UGC to take all such steps as it may think fit
for the promotion and co-ordination of University education and for the
determination and maintenance of standards of teaching, examination and research
in Universities. The words “all such steps” are of wide import. These
guidelines are therefore binding on all the universities and as per the UGC
Regulations, 2003, it is the statutory duty of the Universities to adopt the
guidelines issued by the UGC.
Issue:
Whether
the UGC guidelines dates 06.07.2020 are violative of Article 14 and Article 21
of the Constitution of India?
Held:
The
court held that the differentiation made by the guidelines between final year
students and other students has a rational basis and there is an intelligible
differentia. The final year examination are important because they provide an
opportunity to the students to improve upon their overall score/marks which are
crucial for academic excellence and employment opportunities. There is no
arbitrariness and unreasonableness in the UGC guidelines which require
Universities and Colleges to conduct examination of final year students.
The
Court also held that it cannot be said that Article 14 has been violated just
because the guidelines apply throughout India and one fixed date is given
irrespective of the conditions prevailing in the individual States. The UGC has
rightly fixed one date for the completion of the Final year examinations
throughout the country to maintain uniformity in the academic calendar and for
the welfare of students and their career.
The
Court also noted that the UGC guidelines and the Standard Operating Procedure
formulated by the Ministry of Health shows deep concern for all the
stakeholders involved i.e., the students as well as exam functionaries and does
not violate the fundamental right to life and health under Article 21 of the
Constitution.
Issue:
Whether
the UGC guidelines dated 06.07.2020 are liable to be set aside on the ground of
non-compliance of Section 12 of UGC Act, 1956?
Held:
The
Supreme Court held that term “other bodies” apart from the Universities
enumerated in Section 12 of the UGC Act cannot be stretched to include State
Disaster Management Authority or health experts. Section 12 does not
contemplate any such bodies. Therefore it was held that the guidelines do not
violate Section 12 of the UGC Act because no consultation was taken from the
State Disaster Management Authority and health experts and are not liable to be
set aside.
[Section
12 of the UGC Act deals with powers and functions of the University Grants
Commission].
Issue:
Whether
the State and State Disaster Management Authority in the exercise of
jurisdiction under Disaster Management Act, 2005 can take a decision to not
hold final year examination and can it take decision to award degrees to final
year students by promoting them on basis of result of previous semester exams
and internal assessments in disregard to the UGC guidelines dated 06.07.2020?
Held:
The
Supreme Court has held that the States cannot promote final year students
without holding exams.
The
Court held that the State Disaster Management Authority can postpone exams
overriding the UGC guidelines. The directions of State Disaster Management
Authority for cancelling exams in that particular state will prevail over the
UGC directions by virtue of Section 72 of the Disaster Management Act, 2005.
However, it cannot direct the Universities to
pass final year students based on previous performance and internal assessment
as this is beyond the scope of the State Disaster Management Authority and the
Disaster Management Act, 2005. The court stated that if any state government or
Union Territory cannot conduct exams by 30.09.2020 then they can individually
approach the UGC to postpone the exams and seek extension in light of the
pandemic.