PARSHURAM Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The jurisdiction of this Court is invoked by six petitioners who completed their Bachelor's Degree in Engineering, in distance mode, from the Institute of Advance Studies in Education University, Gandhi Vidya Mandir, Sardar Shahar, District Churu, Rajasthan, in the year 2005. Even before completing their Engineering Degree in distance mode, the petitioners had all joined service as Junior Engineers as they possessed the qualification of a Diploma in Engineering. A degree in Engineering would have enabled the petitioners to be considered for promotion, to the post of Assistant Engineer, in the quota earmarked for Graduates in Engineering.

(2.) The validity of the Bachelor's Degree in Engineering, obtained by the petitioners through distance mode, came up for consideration in Orissa Lift Irrigation Corporation v. Rabi Sankar Patro, (Judgment in Civil Appeal Nos. 17869-17870 of 2017 and batch dtd. 3/11/2017) wherein the Supreme Court observed that there was a distinction between a regular University, established under a Central Act, a Provincial Act or a State Act, and an Institution Deemed to be University managed under the UGC Act; a Deemed to be University could certainly award degrees, but could not use the word "University", by virtue of Sec. 23 of the UGC Act; even after conferral of such status, it still continued to be "an Institution Deemed to be University"; if it was equated with a University, in every sense of the term, it would lead to incoherent and incongruous results, in that its area of operation or the field of its activity would be completely unlimited and unregulated; and this was certainly not the intent of the UGC Act.

(3.) The Supreme Court, thereafter, observed that the expectations from a Deemed to be University are of excellence, research and advancement in its chosen field, for which such status is accorded; while there is no embargo on such Deemed to be University from entering into new areas of education, or introducing new courses, but, in that case, it cannot demand or receive complete relaxation from the regulatory regime; it must satisfy all those requirements which a normal institution is required to fulfill; the logical conclusion was that a Deemed to be University is still an institution of the stature of a "technical institution" and, if it desires to introduce new courses, it must fulfill the requirements of 1994 AICTE Regulations; the Deemed to be University was required to abide by the provisions of the 1994 AICTE Regulations, and could not introduce courses leading to award of degrees in Engineering without the approval of the AICTE; permission granted by the Distance Education Council, allowing the Deemed to be University to introduce courses leading to the award of degrees in Engineering, was illegal and opposed to law; the illegality, in the exercise of power, was to such an extent that it could not be cured by an ex post facto approval granted later; the grant of such approval was only superficial and perfunctory; such power was exercised without causing any inspection; and the endorsement of the decision, by the Joint Committee of UGC - AICTE - DEC dtd. 11/5/2007, was completely flawed.