HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN
WRIT PETITION No.10359 OF 2021
ORDER:
Heard Mr. M. Muralikrishna, learned counsel representing Mr. Balakrishna Mandapati, learned counsel for petitioner, Mrs. Megha Rani Agarwal, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent No.4 and Mr. Ch. Jagannatha Rao, learned Standing Counsel appearing for respondent Nos.2 and 3.
2. This writ petition is filed challenging the impugned letter issued by respondent No.2 basing on the letter No.DEB/QMC/2013, dated 02.08.2013 of respondent N.4.
3. CASE OF THE PETITIONER:
i) The petitioner herein had obtained Degree in Bachelor of Business Administration (BBA) through distance mode from Sikkim Manipal University in 2018.
ii) On the strength of the said Bachelor Degree, the petitioner has appeared for TS LAWCET-2020 Entrance Examination conducted for admission into Bachelor of Law, a 3-Years Degree Course. He secured 6186 State Rank.
2
KL,J W.P. No.10359 of 2021
iii) According to the petitioner, he had requisite qualification to join in LL.B., 3-Years Course on clearing the aforesaid TS LAWCET- 2020 Entrance Examination. On commencement of Counselling, he had realized that an equivalent certificate issued by the concerned University is mandate since he had completed his BBA through distance mode, that too from Sikkim Manipal University. Therefore, he has approached respondent No.2 University with a request to issue equivalent certificate. The said request was not considered. Therefore, he had filed a writ petition vide W.P. No.3827 of 2021. This Court vide order dated 17.02.2021 in I.A. No.1 of 2021 in W.P.No.3827 of 2021 directed the respondent University to consider the case of the petitioner for grant of equivalent certificate, as it was done in the case of one Mr. Shiraaz Ahmed Khan, to enable the petitioner to pursue 3-Years B.L. Course.
iv) The respondents University did not comply with the said order. Therefore, the petitioner herein had filed a Contempt Case vide C.C. No.390 of 2021. Thereafter, respondent Nos.2 and 3 have filed a counter in the said writ petition stating that the request made by the petitioner seeking issuance of equivalent certificate was rejected vide proceedings dated 15.03.2021. Therefore, this Court disposed of the 3 KL,J W.P. No.10359 of 2021 aforesaid writ petition granting liberty to the petitioner to challenge the said rejection proceedings dated 15.03.2021. In view of the same, Contempt Case was also closed.
v) According to the petitioner, Distance Education Programme conducted by Sikkim Manipal University is recognized by respondent No.4 - University Grants Commission (UGC). He relies on the information furnished to him on 24.03.2021 under Right to Information (RTI) Act, 2005. He also placed reliance on the orders in W.P. (C) Nos.4 of 2013 and 8 of 2015 which were upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.
vi) The petitioner also placing reliance on the order of the Sikkim High Court in W.P. (C) No.8 of 2015, dated 26.06.2015, would submit that it had a prospective effect, but not retrospective effect. According to him, a fair understanding of the order is that the jurisdiction of Sikkim Manipal University was decided in accordance with UGC Rules and there were certain exemptions. The said exemptions were upheld by the Apex Court in Special Leave to Appeal (C) No.26223 of 2015 along with S.L.P. (C) No.26239 of 2015 arising out of W.P. No.W.P. (C) No.04 of 2013. 4
KL,J W.P. No.10359 of 2021
vii) With the said submissions, the petitioner herein sought to set aside the impugned rejection letter 15.03.2021.
4. CONTENTIONS OF RESPONDENT Nos.2 AND 3:
i) Respondent Nos.2 and 3 have filed counter contending that requisite qualification for LL.B., is graduation from recognized University. However, candidates can apply for TS LAWCET Entrance Test and verification of certificates will be done only in counseling after the Entrance Test. Issuance of Hall Ticket to attend the Entrance Test is not the testimony for all the required parameters to join the programme when qualified in the test.
ii) In terms of the UGC Guidelines, dated 23.08.2013, the petitioner is not entitled for issuance of equivalent certificate of his BBA course studied in the Centres beyond the territorial jurisdiction of the State of Sikkim. The petitioner studied BBA Course through distance mode from Sikkim Manipal University during the period from May, 2015 to August, 2018 and the same was not recognized by the UGC, New Delhi. The judgment in W.P. (C) No.8 of 2015 is concerned, the petitioners therein have passed degree prior to 2013 5 KL,J W.P. No.10359 of 2021 and, therefore, the said judgment is inapplicable to the facts of the present case.
iii) Respondent Nos.2 and 3 have issued rejection order dated 15.03.2021 basing on the proceedings dated 02.08.2013 of respondent No.4. There is no error in it.
5. CONTENTIONS OF RESPONDENT No.4:
i) Respondent No.4 had also filed counter contending that the Sikkim Manipal University, Sikkim is a State Private University established by the Act of the State Legislature. It is not authorizsed to open study centre/off campus centre beyond the territorial jurisdiction of the State as per the judgment of the Apex Court in Prof. Yash Pal v. State of Chhattisgarh1.
ii) Private Universities cannot affiliate any College or Institution for conducting courses leading to award of its Diplomas, Degrees or other qualifications, and also cannot offer their programmes through franchising arrangement with private institutions for the purpose of conducting courses through distance mode. 1 . (2005) 5 SCC 420 6 KL,J W.P. No.10359 of 2021
iii) A Public Notice dated 27.06.2013 was issued by respondent No.4 on territorial jurisdiction of the Universities and other matters related to distance education. UGC has not granted any approval to the University to open off-campus/study centre anywhere. The said public notice dated 27.06.2013 was only a reiteration of earlier Policy of UGC on territorial jurisdiction of UGC vide Circular D.O. No.0F.1- 52/99 (CPP-II) dated 09.08.2001. Therefore, the petitioner, who has completed his BBA Degree from Sikkim Manipal University through distance mode, is not entitled for equivalency certificate.
iv) With the aforesaid submissions, learned Standing Counsel sought to dismiss the writ petition.
6. In view of the aforesaid rival submissions, the question that fell for consideration before this Court is:
Whether the petitioner herein, who obtained BBA Degree through distance mode from Sikkim Manipal University, is entitled for equivalent certificate from Osmania University?
7. ANALAYSIS AND FINDING OF THE COURT:
i) Respondent No.4 herein - UGC is a statutory Organization of the Government of India by an Act of Parliament in 1956, for the co- 7
KL,J W.P. No.10359 of 2021 ordination, determination and maintenance of standards of teaching, examination and research in University Education.
ii) There is no dispute that Sikkim Manipal University is a State Private University established by the Act of State Legislature and is empowered to award degrees as specified by the UGC under Section - 22 of the UGC Act, 1968 through its main campus with the approval of concerned statutory bodies/councils, wherever required.
iii) As per Section - 12 (d) of the UGC Act, 1956, the UGC has been vested with the power to recommend to any University the measures necessary for the improvement of University Education and advice the University upon the action to be taken for the purpose of implementation of such recommendations. The UGC is also authorized to perform such other functions as may be prescribed or as may be deemed necessary by the UGC for advancing the cause of Higher Education in India or as may be incidental or conducive to the discharge of its functions. The UGC has also power under Section - 26 of the UGC Act, 1956 to make regulations consistent with the Act for the said purposes. It is a core function of the UGC to see that teaching standards in Universities / Colleges do not get diluted. 8
KL,J W.P. No.10359 of 2021
iv) It is relevant to note that the Apex Court in Prof. Yashpal1 held that that in view of Article 245 (1) of the Constitution of India, Parliament alone is competent to make laws for the whole or any part of the territory of India and the Legislature of the State may make laws for the whole or any part of the State. Universities are not authorized to open study centre / off campus centres beyond the territorial jurisdiction of the University.
v) Pursuant to the said judgment, respondent No.4 had formulated territorial jurisdiction policy. It had issued public notice dated 27.06.2013 clarifying that a University established or incorporated by or under a State Act shall operate only within the territorial jurisdiction allotted to it under its Act and in no case beyond the territory of the State of its location. It had also addressed a letter dated 08.09.2015 to the Osmania University stating that territorial jurisdiction in respect of that University for offering programmes through distance mode will be as per the policy of UGC on territorial jurisdiction and opening of off-campuses / centres / study centres as mentioned in UGC Notification dated 26.07.2013. The programmes in distance mode will not be offered through franchising arrangement and / or through any private institution / college. Therefore, all the 9 KL,J W.P. No.10359 of 2021 Universities had been following the said guidelines and policy issued by the UGC. Thus, vide the aforesaid notification, respondent No.4 had clarified categorically on the territorial jurisdiction to be followed by all the Universities / Institutions including Osmania University.
vi) It is also not in dispute that respondent No.4 herein is a State University. It was accorded post facto programme-wise recognition by the erstwhile Distance Education Council (DEC) for the academic year 1995 to 2007-08 to offer specific programmes. It was accorded provisional recognition for one year vide letter dated 31.08.2007 which was further continued vide letter dated 17.12.2009. The same was continued up to academic year 2017-18. It is also not in dispute that the UGC had notified UGC (Open and Distance Learning Programmes and Online Programmes) Regulations, 2020 vide Gazette, dated 04.12.2020 and the same was amended vide Notification, dated 01.07.2021. A list of Higher Educational Institutions including respondent No.4 with recognized programmes under Open and Distance Mode for the Academic Session beginning February - March, 2021 to 2024-January, 25.
10
KL,J W.P. No.10359 of 2021
vii) Sikkim Manipal University, being the State University can operate within its State only. The University is not authorized to open Centre / Off-Campus Centre beyond the territorial jurisdiction of the State in view of the principle laid down by the Apex Court in Prof. Yashpal1 and also as per the public notice dated 27.06.2013 issued by respondent No.4 - UGC. It is also not in dispute that respondent No.4 has been issuing instructions / guidelines after the judgment of the Apex Court in Prof. Yashpal1. Sikkim Manipal University as well as respondent No.3 University, have to necessarily follow the said guidelines / instructions issued by respondent No.4 by invoking its powers laid down under UGC Act, 1956.
viii) The University can conduct courses through its own departments, its constituent colleges and/or through its affiliated institutions. There is, however, no provision for leaving it to private institutions for conducting courses leading to award its degrees. As per recent UGC Guidelines, the Universities are permitted to impart education and award its degrees through their own campus located elsewhere in the country or even at their own off shore campuses with the approval of the UGC.
11
KL,J W.P. No.10359 of 2021
ix) Looking into wide spread menace of franchising the University education through the private institutions, the UGC has decided that any University which proposed to enter into collaboration with any private institution, would be required to take prior approval of the UGC. The commission has also decided that no University should be permitted to go for off campus private educational franchise leading to the award of its degrees.
x) Accordingly, all the Universities are being directed to stop franchising their degree education through private agencies/establishments with immediate effect. Thus, the petitioner, who has completed his BBA Degree from Sikkim Manipal University through distance mode, is not entitled for equivalency certificate.
xi) Joint Committee of UGC-AICTE-DEC vide its letter dated 13.05.2003 directed to all Vice Chancellor/Head of Institutions to limit the distance education programme of the Institutions to the neighbourhood to limit the distance education programme of the Institutions to the neighbourhood of the location of the main campus or at the most within the State. The Apex Court in Prof. Yashpal1 held that in view of Article 245 (1) of the Constitution of India, 12 KL,J W.P. No.10359 of 2021 Parliament alone is competent to make laws for the whole or any part of the territory of India and the Legislature of the State may make laws for the whole or any part of the State.
xii) Pursuant to the observation of the Apex Court, the UGC issued two letters No.F.9-8/2008 (CPP-I), dated 16.04.2009 addressed to all the State Governments and dated 15.06.2009 addressed to Vice Chancellors of all State University with the following:
Vide letter dated 16.04.2009, it was requested to (i) take immediate action to take suitable steps for amending the existing Acts made so as to bring the same in conformity with the observations made by the Apex Court; and (ii) to stop all the State/State Private University in the State from operating beyond the territorial jurisdiction of their State in any manner.
Vide letter dated 15.06.2009, it was requested to ensure that no off campus centre (s)/study centre/affiliating college and the centres operating through franchises is opened by the University outside the territorial jurisdiction of the State in view of the judgment of the Apex Court.
UGC vide its letter F.No.28-2/2015 (DEB-III) dated 04.05.2016, while drawing the attention to the above mentioned letter again requested all the State Education Secretaries as under:
1. Take immediate action to take suitable steps for amending the exiting Acts (if not done so far) made 13 KL,J W.P. No.10359 of 2021 so as to bring the same in conformity with the observations made by the Apex court and;
2. To stop all the State/State Private University in the State from operating beyond the territorial jurisdiction of their State in any manner;
3. To check and stop all other University (except Central University) to operate in any manner in your state."
xiii) As far as Examination Centres are concerned, UGC vide Public Notice issued vide F.No.12-9/2016 (DEB-III) dated 19.07.2016 clarified as under:
"It has come to notice of the UGC that some Institutions/University/Institutions Deemed to be University is conducting examinations for their Open and Distance Learning (ODL) programmes outside the State of their location or beyond their territorial jurisdiction which are wholly illegal. The policy of the UGC with regard to territorial jurisdiction and off-campuses/study centres has been clearly articulated in its Public Notice dated 27.06.2013."
xiv) It is also relevant to note that vide the aforesaid public notice dated 27.06.2013, respondent No.4 had advised the students not to take admission in the unapproved Study Centres, Off-Campus Centres, Franchisee Institutions, Colleges / Institutions claiming to be affiliated with Private Universities or Deemed Universities. It is 14 KL,J W.P. No.10359 of 2021 relevant to note that the aforesaid public notice dated 27.06.2013 was only reiteration.
xv) This Court in B. Sai Kiran v. The State of Telangana, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Higher Education Dept., Hyderabad2, considering all the aforesaid aspects and also the principle laid down by the Apex Court in Prof. Yashpal1, dismissed the said writ petition filed by the petitioner therein seeking a direction to the respondents therein to treat the Graduation Courses / Bachelors Degree obtained by them as valid for all purposes including for admissions into Higher Education and Employment purposes. In the said case also, the petitioners have obtained graduation degrees through distant education mode offered by the Acharya Nagarjuna University. No writ appeal was filed and the said order attained finality.
xvi) A Division Bench of this Court in M. Naveen Kumar v. The State of Telangana, rep. by its Secretary, Higher Education, Hyderabad3 held that Osmania University does not have power to declare its B.A. (External) Degree as a recognized degree or 2 . Order in W.P. No.3006 of 2021, decided on 17.08.2022 3 . W.A. No.597 of 2020, W.P. Nos.37566 & 42680/2016 and 28822/2021, decided on 28.12.2021 15 KL,J W.P. No.10359 of 2021 equivalent degree. The said power lies with the UGC only and no such equivalence certificate has been brought to the notice of this Court issued by the UGC.
xvii) Considering the said facts, respondent No.2 vide letter dated 15.03.2021 rejected the request made by the petitioner to issue equivalency certificate. There is no error in it. Therefore, the petitioner herein failed to make out any ground to interfere with the said proceedings.
8. CONCLUSION:
i) In view of the aforesaid discussion, the petitioner is not entitled for any relief, much less the relief sought in the present writ petition and, therefore, the same is liable to dismissed.
ii) The present Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the writ petition shall stand closed.
_________________ K. LAKSHMAN, J 27th December, 2022 Mgr