-
by Admin
07 May 2024 2:49 AM
In a significant legal development, the High Court has delivered a judgment that could have far-reaching implications for higher education in India. The ruling, delivered by HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA, addresses concerns about unspecified courses and the inaction of the University Grants Commission (UGC) in regulating them.
The High Court's observation on the issue is crystal clear: "UGC is directed to take appropriate necessary actions to ensure compliance of the provisions of the UGC Act, 1956." This directive has highlighted the urgency of enforcing standardized degrees across universities and institutions, with a particular focus on protecting students' rights.
The petitioner in this case had filed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) drawing attention to the lack of accountability and consistency in the UGC's regulations regarding unspecified courses offered by educational institutions. The petitioner sought various reliefs related to the standardization of degree nomenclature, accountability of UGC officials, and the protection of students' fundamental rights.
One of the key issues raised in the judgment was the violation of students' fundamental rights under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The Court affirmed that students have the right to pursue recognized and meaningful degrees, free from the uncertainty caused by unspecified courses. The judgment also highlighted the potential discrimination faced by students holding unrecognized degrees.
The Court's decision is seen as a response to the growing concerns surrounding the commercialization of education and the need for strict regulation to maintain the quality of higher education in the country. The petitioner had cited a Supreme Court judgment, Orissa Lift Irrigation Corp. Ltd. v. Rabi Shankar Patro and Ors., emphasizing the role of the UGC in regulating education and the importance of effective implementation of regulations.
Additionally, the judgment addressed the penalties imposed under Section 24 of the UGC Act, 1956, which were considered insufficient for deterring universities from conferring unspecified degrees. The petitioner argued that these penalties should be commensurate with the nature and scope of the breaches.
This ruling serves as a wake-up call to educational institutions and the UGC to ensure strict compliance with the UGC Act, 1956, and to maintain uniformity in degree standards. It also underscores the need for universities to adhere to the approved nomenclature of degrees and prioritize the observance of minimum standards of instruction before awarding degrees.
While the judgment has not cited specific referred cases or representing advocates, it is expected to trigger a wave of discussions and actions aimed at rectifying the inconsistencies in the Indian higher education system and safeguarding students' rights.
Date of Decision: 27 September 2023
RAHUL MAHAJAN vs MINISTRY OF EDUCATION & ORS.
[gview file="https://lawyerenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/Rahul_Mahajan_vs_Ministry_Of_Education_Ors_on_27_September_2023.pdf"]
