Allegations In Matrimonial Disputes Must Be Specific And Supported By Foundation Facts To Avoid Abuse Of Process: Supreme Court Supreme Court Modifies Sentence To Period Already Undergone Citing Medical Condition And Expression Of Remorse Qualification Of '10+2 System' Cannot Be Equated With Other Certifications Absent An Equivalence Clause: Supreme Court Essential Qualifications In Recruitment Cannot Be Diluted Or Subject To Judicial Equivalence: Supreme Court Court Has Discretion To Decide Genuineness Of Signature By Comparison; Not Essential To Invoke Expert Opinion In All Cases: Supreme Court Civil Disputes Cannot Be Converted Into Criminal Offences To Recover Money: Supreme Court Quashes FIR Under Section 420 IPC Taxing Authorities Must Classify Goods Based On Form At Time Of Sale, Not End Use: Supreme Court Suit For Declaration Of Status Must Seek Consequential Relief To Avoid Bar Of Proviso: Allahabad High Court Illegal Detention | Police Failure To Maintain CCTV Footage Invokes Adverse Presumption Under Sec 119 BSA Against State: Allahabad High Court Section 138 NI Act | Accused Rebuts Presumption By Proving Intimation Of Misplaced Cheque To Bank And Lack Of Documentation For Alleged Settlement: Andhra Pradesh High Court Garnishee Proceedings Under CPC | Disputed Debt Cannot Be Summarily Adjudicated Without Leading Evidence: Bombay High Court Criminal Procedure (Identification) Act 2022 | Magistrate’s Power Under Section 5 To Direct DNA Profiling Is Not Conditional Upon Consent: Calcutta High Court Conviction Based On 'Assumption And Presumption' Cannot Be Sustained: Bombay High Court Acquits Husband Limitation Act | Suit For Specific Performance Must Be Filed Within Reasonable Time Even If No Date For Performance Is Fixed: Delhi High Court Enrolment As Advocate | Bar Council Must Consider 'Equivalent Qualifications' Under Rule 4(a) Rules Of Legal Education: Karnataka High Court Section 482 BNSS | Pre-Arrest Bail Is Not A Matter Of Course; Must Show Special Case For Invoking Extraordinary Jurisdiction: Kerala High Court Hindu Succession Act | A Co-parcener Cannot Alienate Entire Property; Non-Impleaded Legal Heir Not Bound By Previous Decree: Madras High Court Purchaser During Pendency Of Suit Bound By Compromise Decree, Cannot Treat It As Void In Collateral Proceedings: Punjab & Haryana High Court Order 23 Rule 1-A CPC | In Partition Suits, Defendants Asserting A Share Can Seek Transposition If Original Plaintiffs Withdraw: Patna High Court Section 69 BNS | Suppression Of Subsisting Marriage Or Live-In Relationship During Marriage Proposal Constitutes 'Deceitful Means': Kerala High Court Anticipatory Bail | Mere Apprehension Of Investigating Agency Is Insufficient To Deny Bail Without Demonstrating Necessity Of Custodial Interrogation: Telangana High Court Income Tax Evasion | Criminal Prosecution Under Section 276C IT Act Cannot Sustain Once Foundation Assessment Order Is Set Aside: Punjab & Haryana High Court Election Petition Must Be Presented By Petitioner In Person, Non-Compliance Renders It Liable To Summary Dismissal: Supreme Court Absence Of Recovery Or Evidence Of Stolen Property Precludes Conviction Under Section 394 IPC: Supreme Court

Equal Treatment is a Constitutional Right: Delhi High Court Mandates Extension of Re-Admission for IGNOU Engineering Students

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


Delhi High Court rules in favor of engineering students, directing IGNOU to extend re-admission benefits previously granted to diploma students.

The Delhi High Court, July 2024, delivered a significant judgment in favor of students pursuing B. Tech programs under the Indira Gandhi National Open University (IGNOU) – Vertically Integrated Engineering Programme (VIEP). The court directed IGNOU to extend the re-admission benefit, previously granted to diploma students, to B. Tech students as well. This decision comes as a relief to many students who had been struggling to complete their engineering degrees due to administrative barriers.

The petitioners, various pharmacy colleges and students enrolled in the B. Tech programs under the IGNOU-VIEP scheme during 2009-2011, sought the same re-admission extension that was granted to diploma students. IGNOU had initially provided re-admission benefits to diploma students to clear their backlog papers but had denied the same to degree students, prompting the legal challenge.

In examining the procedures and compliance issues, the court highlighted the disparity in the treatment of diploma and degree students. "There is no justification to deny, to the petitioners, the facilities of two years ERP, as was extended to diploma students," noted Justice C. Hari Shankar.

The court observed that IGNOU's argument, which contended that the decision of re-admission only applied to Open and Distance Learning (ODL) courses, lacked merit. "The decision taken by the Academic Council (AC) of IGNOU in its 72nd meeting, therefore, overrules the decision of the School of Engineering and Technology (SOET) in its noting dated 30 January 2019," the judgment stated.

The court extensively discussed the principles of fairness and non-discrimination under Article 14 of the Constitution. It emphasized that the differential treatment between diploma and degree students had no rational basis. "No intelligible differentia can be said to exist between students who had undertaken diploma, and those who had undertaken engineering courses under the IGNOU-VIEP," Justice Shankar observed.

Justice Shankar remarked, "The decision in Orissa Lift Irrigation Corporation, if anything, approves conducting of engineering courses by face-to-face mode rather than by ODL mode," thereby supporting the legitimacy of the petitioners' programs.

The judgment signifies the judiciary's role in ensuring equitable treatment in educational policies. By mandating IGNOU to extend re-admission benefits to B. Tech students, the court reinforces the principle that administrative decisions must adhere to constitutional standards of fairness and equality. This landmark decision is expected to influence future policies on educational re-admissions, ensuring that all students, regardless of their course level, receive fair treatment.

 

Date of Decision: July 01, 2024

Pandya Kushalbhai Ghanshyambhai & Ors. vs. Indira Gandhi National Open University & Ors.

Latest Legal News