Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Sumanta Majumder vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 3 August, 2023
MAT 1499 of 2016
Item-2.
04-08-2023
Sumanta Majumder
Versus
The State of West Bengal & Ors.
sg
Ct. 8
Mr. Bikram Banerjee, Adv.
Mr. Sudipta Dasgupta, Adv.
Mr. Arka Nandi, Adv.
Ms. Sagorika Goswami, Adv.
Ms. Dipa Acharyya, Adv.
Mr. Saikat Sutradhar, Adv.
Mr. Sagar Dey, Adv.
Mr. Sutirtha Nayek, Adv.
Ms. Saplopani, Raha, Adv.
Ms. Shalini Ghosh, Adv.
...for the appellant/petitioner
Mr. Biswaroop Bhattacharya, Adv.
Mr. Kaushik De, Adv.
Mr. Pourush Bandyopadhyay, Adv.
Mr. Mohini Majumdar, Adv.
Mr. Raghav Munshi, Adv.
...for the Vice-Chancellor,
Madhurai Kamraj University
Mr. Pulak Ranjan Mandal, Adv.
Ms. Bandana Mandal, Adv.
...for College Service Commission
Ms. Tapati Samanta, Adv.
...for the State
Mr. Anil Kumar Gupta, Adv.
...for the UGC
1.
We have heard Mr. Biswaroop Bhattacharya, learned
Counsel appearing on behalf of the Madurai Kamraj
University and Mr. Anil Kumar Gupta, learned Counsel
for the UGC.
2. In course of hearing, the attention of this Court is drawn
to a communication from Indira Gandhi National Open
University, which was, at the relevant time, the Nodal
Agency of the UGC dealing with the approval of the 'off
Campus Study Centre'. The document disclosed on
behalf of the Kamraj University, prima facie, gives an
impression that consequent upon the judgement of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in (2005) 5 SCC 420
(Prof. Yashpal & Anr. -Vs. - State of Chhattisgarh &
Ors.), the UGC was contemplating running of the off-
campus study centre beyond the territorial jurisdiction of
the respective State for a certain period of time with a
view to protect the interest of the students who might
have been admitted in the meantime and had pursued
their courses or had completed their courses. The
communication disclosed would show that the State
Universities were directed to make suitable amendment
with regard to territorial jurisdiction for offering
distance education consequent upon the judgment of
Yashpal (supra).
3. The learned Counsel for the Madurai Kamraj University
as well as the writ petitioner have relied upon a decision
as appears from the minutes of 35th Meeting of the
Distance Education Council held on 10th March, 2010
where the territorial jurisdiction in offering programmes
through distance mode was considered as item no. 35.3
which reads follows:
"The Council in its 28th meeting held on 23rd March,
2007, had decided that jurisdiction for offering
programmes through distance mode will be as per the
Acts and Statues of the concerned university. However,
in the ninth Joint Committee of UGC-AICTE & DEC
held on 17.08.2009 regarding territorial jurisdiction for
offering programmes through distance mode, it was
decided that the latest UGC notifications will prevail
over all previous notifications and circulars of the DEC.
The Council considered the roles and responsibility and
the authority of the Joint Committee and decided that the
Joint Committee can not supercede the Statutory
Authority of the Distance Education Council. The
Council noted that the distance education and online
education cannot have the Territorial Jurisdiction and it
was decided that in case of Central Universities and the
State Universities, the Territorial Jurisdiction will be as
per their Acts and Statues for offering programmes
through distance mode. The Territorial Jurisdiction in
case of Deemed Universities will be as per UGC which
mandates the prior approval of the UGC for opening
Centres/off Campus Centres outside the Headquarters.
The Territorial Jurisdiction in case of Private Institution
(other than Universities) will be as decided by the Joint
Committee."
4. In view of the aforesaid, it is now necessary for the UGC
to disclose by an affidavit the steps taken by the UGC
prior to 10th March, 2010 in respect of the recognized
Universities offering distance mode of education
through off campus study centres and during the
interregnum period, after the judgment was delivered in
Yashpal (supra) and whether recognition / permission
was granted to such courses to other Universities.
5. All the aforesaid details are required for the proper
adjudication of the dispute.
6. The Madurai Kamraj University shall file an affidavit
disclosing correspondence made for obtaining
recognition / approval of the off campus study centre at
Gajiabad before commencement of the course.
7. Mr. Pulak Ranjan Mandal, learned Counsel for the
College Service Commission, however, submits that all
the Universities are bound to follow Yashpal (supra)
and that should be strictly adhered to. All the points are
to be considered after affidavits are filed by the Kamraj
University and UGC in this regard as we feel that the
academic interest of the students is a paramount
consideration and the candidates should not suffer if
there is ambiguity in this regard.
8. The Madurai Kamraj University and UGC shall file their
affidavits within three weeks from date.
9. The matter stands adjourned for five weeks.
10. All affidavits shall be exchanged in the meantime.
11. The affidavit of the University shall also disclose
whether the statute authorizes the University to run off
campus study centre.
12. The State may also file an affidavit disclosing relevant
documents as well as the stand of the State Government
with regard to the said academic qualification of the
appellant.
(Saugata Bhattacharyya, J.) (Soumen Sen, J.)
