The Supreme Court on Thursday(10.12.2020) held that Universities cannot dilute the standards prescribed by AICTE for any courses in colleges but they certainly have the power to stipulate enhanced level and norms for grant of affiliations.( APJ ABDUL KALAM TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY vs. JAI BHARATH COLLEGE OF MANAGEMENT AND ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY)
The top court observed that in present times, no university can afford to have a laid-back attitude when their own performance is being measured by international standards and therefore, the power of the universities to prescribe enhanced norms and standards, cannot be doubted.
A bench of Chief Justice S A Bobde and Justices AS Bopanna and V Ramasubramanian set aside an order of Kerala High Court and upheld a decision of state-run APJ Abdul Kalam Technological University fixing enhanced norms for affiliation of courses offered by colleges.
The Vice-Chancellor of the APJ Abdul Kalam Technological University had filed the appeal against the Kerala High Court judgment which directed it re-consider the application for affiliation of a new B.Tech course, submitted by a college.
The University was a self-financing Institution that earlier offered 5 types of B.Tech courses. The intake of the university was 60 students per course. The University in February/March-2020 sought approval of AICTE for starting a new course in “Artificial Intelligence and Data Science” with the intake of 60 students per every Academic Year 2020-21. The application for the same was also submitted according to the regulations. In accordance with the approval of the procedure of initiating a new course, the university also paid the Inspection fee/Affiliation fee. But before the University was able to start a new course, abruptly the State of Kerala on the basis of a study conducted noted that there is a drop in the intake of students in self-financing engineering colleges.
The State, in light of the study, decided to initiate the procedure of starting a new course rigid, thereby laying down these conditions to be satisfied before starting the course as hereunder:
- The college should have NBA accreditation
- The admission of the students in the previous academic year should have been more than 50% of the sanctioned intake.
- That the proposed course should have AICTE approval and NOC from the State Government
- The proposed course should have industry demand potential.
The sub-committee which was dealing with this issue did not grant affliction for the initiation of the new course.
The bench observed that the law is now fairly well settled that while it is not open to the Universities to dilute the norms and standards prescribed by AICTE, it is always open to the Universities to prescribe enhanced norms. As regards the role of the Universities visàvis the AICTE, this Court held in Bharathidasan University and Another vs. All India Council for Technical Education and Others, that AICTE is not a super power with a devastating role undermining the status, authority and autonomous functioning of the Universities in areas and spheres assigned to them.
The bench taking note of the counter affidavit filed by AICTE in this case, observed:
“Though AICTE has reserved to itself the power to conduct inspections and take penal action against colleges for false declarations, such penal action does not mean anything and does not serve any purpose for the students who get admitted to colleges which have necessary infrastructure only on paper and not on site. The Regulations of the AICTE are silent as to how the students will get compensated, when penal action is taken against colleges which host false information online in their applications to AICTE. Ultimately, it is the universities which are obliged to issue degrees and whose reputation is inextricably intertwined with the fate and performance of the students, that may have to face the music and hence their role cannot be belittled. Today, even the universities are being ranked according to the quality of standards maintained by them. The Ministry of Human Resources Development of the Government of India launched an initiative in September 2015, known as National Institutional Ranking Framework (NIRF), for ranking institutions including universities in India. The ranking is based on certain parameters such as: (i) Teaching, Learning and Resources; (ii) Research and Professional Practice; (iii) Graduation Outcomes; (iv) Outreach and Inclusivity; and (v) Peer Perception. No State run university can afford to have a laidback attitude today, when their own performance is being measured by international standards. Therefore, the power of the universities to prescribe enhanced norms and standards, cannot be doubted.”
The bench observed that the Kerala High Court had relied on the Supreme Court judgment in Rungta Engineering College, Bhilai and Another vs .Chattisgarh Swami Vivekanand Technical university "Rungta Engineering College did not take note of the judgments in Bharathidasan University, etc. Therefore, it cannot be said to reflect the correct position in law".
On the other issue also, the bench observed that High Court erred in holding that the resolutions passed by the Syndicate prescribing norms and standards for the grant of affiliation for additional courses, are ultra vires the Act.
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com
Share this Document :Picture Source :
