Delhi High Court
Master Shashank Mohan vs The Council Of Iits & Another on 20 January, 2009
Author: Ajit Prakash Shah
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ WP(C) 21488/2005
MASTER SHASHANK MOHAN ..... Appellant
Through: Mr. Diwakar Singh,Adv.
versus
THE COUNCIL OF IITS & ANR. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Maninder Singh, Mr. Kirtiman
Singh and Mr. T. Singhdev,Advs.
CORAM:
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA
ORDER
% 20.01.2009
The petitioner is a 12th standard student and is aspirant for
getting admission in the Indian Institute of Technology (IIT). The
petitioner is challenging the eligibility criteria of Joint Entrance
Examination (JEE), 2006 which came into force w.e.f. academic
year 2006. This new eligibility criteria was introduced on 1.10.2005
and relevant portion reads as follows:-
"Eligibility
1. Candidates appearing in (10+2) or equivalent
qualifying examination in 2006 must secure at
least 60% (55% for SC/ST and PD) marks in
aggregate in their respective Board Examination.
In case the respective Boards award letter grades,
without providing a norm for converting them to
equivalent percentage marks, the norms decided
by the Joint Implementation Committee of JEE
shall be final (details to be provided in the
Information Brochure of JEE-2006).
2. A student can have only two attempts to write JEE
with effect from 2006-in the year in which he or she
passes the XII standard examination and/or in the
following year.
3. Candidates who join any of the IITs, IT-BHU,
Varanasi and ISM, Dhanbad through JEE-2006 will
NOT be permitted to appear in JEE in future.
4. xxxxxxxx"
2. The contention of the petitioner is that the respondent-Council
has no power to prescribe eligibility criteria i.e. 60% marks in +2
examination for admission to under-graduate courses at the
respondent Nos. 2 to 8. It is contended that the Council cannot
bypass or ignore the statutory authority of All India Council of
Technical Education (AICTE). It is contended that the said change
in admission criteria for JEE is arbitrary and is not based on rational
or relevant consideration.
3. It is further contended that the provisions restricting and giving
only two attempts to write and appear in JEE exams as well as to
debar a candidate who has joined any IIT, I.T.-BHU, Varanasi and
ISM Dhanbad from appearing in JEE in future are arbitrary and
discriminatory.
4. IITs are constituted under separate enactment of Parliament
i.e. The Institutes of Technical Education Act, 1961 and regulated by
the IIT Council with the Minister of Human Resource Development
as the Chairman. The Joint Entrance Examination (JEE) is an
entrance examination for admission to IIT, IT-BHU, Varanasi and
ISM, Dhanbad. AICTE prescribes the guidelines for admission to
Engineering courses conducted in the country. AICTE guidelines
have no applicability to courses conducted by the IITs in the country.
It is also well settled that it is permissible for the institutes to
prescribe minimum eligibility qualification which can be higher than
the one prescribed by AICTE. In this connection, reference may be
made to judgments in WP(C) No. 290/1997 titled Dr. Preeti
Srivastava and Anr. V. State of M.P. & Ors. reported in (1999) 7
SCC 120 and Tamilnadu and another versus S.V. Bratheep &
Others reported in AIR 2004 SC 1861. In Pranjal Verma &
Sawalia Saurabh versus Union of india & Ors. reported in
1994(31)DRJ(DB) a Division Bench of this Court has held that
prescription of 60% qualifying marks by Delhi College of
Engineering cannot be said to be in violation of the guidelines laid
down by AICTE inasmuch as the institute has authority to impose its
own eligibility conditions for admission to maintain its academic
standards which are higher than the minimum standard prescribed
and no interference by the Court is called for.
5. In the affidavit filed on behalf of the Council it has been
explained that it is only to achieve the highest standards in the
courses conducted by the IITs and to make its further objective to
rationalize the process of selection of students that minimum
stipulation of 60% marks has been prescribed. The fixation of
minimum marks of 60% in the plus two examination is neither
illogical or irrational.
6. The challenge to the stipulation restricting/giving only two
chances and the provision debarring a candidate from appearing in
JEE once he takes admission in any of the IITs, IT-BHU, ISM-
Dhanbad is also without any substance. These are essentially
matters of policy and would not be questioned under Article 226 of
the Constitution unless it, per se, is irrational or discriminatory.
7. In these circumstances, we find absolutely no substance in
this petition. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed.
CHIEF JUSTICE
SANJIV KHANNA, J.
JANUARY 20, 2009
Rd
