text stringlengths 5 5.67k |
|---|
Thus the Government policy was not to grant fresh approvals ARG |
If more approvals were granted,it might lead to commercialisation of education ARG |
The following points arise for consideration : (1 Ratio |
Whether in view of the judgment of this Court in State of Tamil Nadu & Another v Ratio |
Adhiyaman Educational & Research Institute & Others,[1995] 4 SCC 104 1995 Indlaw SC 1631,the provisions of the AICTE Act,1987 occupied the field and it was not necessary to obtain the further approval of the Government or other authority Ratio |
Whether any statute in the State of Kerala if it required such approval,would be void Ratio |
2) Whether the orders of rejection passed by the State Government were valid on merits and whether the University should have granted further orders to continue the affiliation solely on the basis of the AICTE permission Ratio |
Point 1 FAC |
This point is more or less covered by the judgment of this Court in State of Tamil Nadu PRE |
But,in the context of s.10(K) regarding 'approval' for starting a technical institution,certain aspects of the judgment need to be highlighted Ratio |
Before we refer to the abovesaid judgment,it will be necessary to refer to certain provisions of the AICTE Act and the relevant regulations Ratio |
The abovesaid Act was an act to provide for the establishment of All India Council for Technical Education with a view to the proper planning and coordinated development of the technical education system throughout the country,the promotion of qualitative improvement of such education in relation to planned quantitativ... |
U/s.10 of the Act,it is stated that it is the duty of the Council constituted under the Act to take all steps as the said Council might think fit for ensuring coordinated and integrated develop-ment of technical education and maintenance of standards STA |
For the purposes of performing its functions under the Act,the Council may (a) undertake survey in various fields of technical education,collect data on all related matters and make forecast of the needed growth and development in technical education; (b) coordinate the development of technical education in the country... |
The clause in S.10(1) which is important in the present case is subcl.(k) of s.10(1) and it provides that the Council might "grant approval for starting new technical institutions and for introduction of new courses or programmes in consultation with the agencies concerned STA |
Sub-cl.(1) permits the Council to advice the Central Government in certain respects,sub-cl.(m) lay down norms for granting autonomy,subcl.(n) to take necessary steps to prevent commercialisation of technical education,cl.(o) to provide guidelines for admission of students to technical institutions and Universities impa... |
S.11 of the Act deals with inspection STA |
Regulations have been framed on 31st October,1994 by the AICTE in exercise of powers conferred on it by s.23(1) of the AICTE Act STA |
Regulation 2 states that these regulations will be applicable to proposals relating to "(a) grant of approval of the Council for establishment of new technical institutions including Universities or University depart-ments and deemed Universities and for technical institutions function-ing on the date of commencement o... |
Regulation 4 deals with the requirement of grant of approval and for the commencement of these regulations "(a STA |
b) no course or programme shall be introduced in any technical institutions,university or deemed university or university departments or college; or (c) no technical institutions,Universities or deemed Universities or University Departments or colleges shall continue to admit students for degree or diploma courses or p... |
d) no approved intake capacity of seats shall be increased or varied : except with the approval of the Council STA |
Reg..4(2 STA |
Regulation 5 deals with the Forms of the Applications and Regulation 6 deals with the conditions for grant of approval,Sub-cls.1 of Regulation 6 deals with the financial position STA |
Sub-cl.2 with the courses or programmes and sub-cl.3 deals with the power of admissions and sub-cl.4 with tuition fees etc.and sub-cl.5 with the staff and sub-cl.6 with the Governing Body of the private institutions and subcl.7 with other matters STA |
Regulation 8 deals with scrutiny of applications STA |
There is a prelimi-nary scrutiny of the applications by the Bureau RC of the Council STA |
Sub-cl.4 of Regulation 8 reads as follows STA |
Reg.8(4 STA |
The Bureau RC shall invite comments/recommendations on the applications referred to in sub-regulation (3) from the follow-ing,namely STA |
i) the State Government concerned ; (ii) the affiliating University/State Board of Technical Education; (iii) Bureaus MPCD; (iv) Bureau BOS; (v) Bureau RA; (vi) the Regional Office STA |
Sub-cl.5 of Regulation 8 requires the Regional Office to arrange visits by an Expert Committee constituted by the Council which is to forward its recommendations to the Council Ratio |
Sub-cl.6 of Regulation 8 states that the State Level Committee constituted under Regulation 9(4) is to consider the recommendations of the State Government and others mentioned in regulation 8(4) and that it is to make its recommendations to the Central Task Force constituted under regulation 9(5) and consider the reco... |
Sub-cls.8 STA |
9 of Regulation 8 are important and read as follows : "Reg.8(8) If there is a disagreement in the recommendations made by the State Government,University or the Regional Committee,the Central Task Force shall invite representatives of the respective agencies for further consultations before making final recommenda-tion... |
On the recommendation of the Central Task Force,the Council shall decide the question of grant of approval as sought for in the application STA |
Provided that the Council may,for reasons to be communicated to the applicant,allow the approval with such restrictions or modifications as it may deem necessary STA |
Sub-cl.10 of Regulation 8 states that the decision of the Council shall be communicated to the State Government concerned or the UGC,as the case may be,the concerned University or the State Board,the Regional Office and the applicant before 30th April in case the application was made before the preceding 31st December ... |
The Tamil Nadu case Ratio |
As stated earlier,the above provisions of the AICTE Act,came up for consideration in State of Tamil Nadu v PRE |
Adhiyaman Educational & Research Institute,[1995] 4 SCC 104 1995 Indlaw SC 1631 PRE |
In the above matter,the State of Tamil Nadu granted permission on 17.4.84 to all private managements to start private Engineering colleges without financial commitment to government but subject to conditions PRE |
At that time in 1984,the AICTE Act was not on the statute book PRE |
The Government of Tamil Nadu granted permission to the Trust for the academic year 1987-88 to start an Engineering college PRE |
The University also granted permission on 21.11.87 for the academic year 1987 PRE |
88.Later on,these permissions were withdrawn by the State after issuing show cause on 16.7.89.So did the University on 26.7.89.But by that date,the AICTE Act,1987 had come into force PRE |
The learned Single Judge and the Division Bench held in favour of the Trust and quashed and orders of the Government and the University PRE |
The said judgments were affirmed by this Court PRE |
It was held that the AICTE Act was referable to Entry 66,List PRE |
I of the Constitution of India,relating to "coordination and determination of standards in institutions for higher education or research and scientific and technical institutions".After the Constitutional Amendment (42 Amendment Act,1976) Entry 25 of List III in the Concurrent List PRE |
read : "Education,included technical education,medical institution and Universities,subject to the provisions of Entries 63,64,65 and 66 of List I; vocational and technical training of labour".Thus,the State law under Entry 23 of List III would be repugnant to any law made by the Parliament under Entry 66 of List I,to ... |
The Tamil Nadu Act was of 1976 and the University Act was of 1923 and were laws referable to the List PRE |
III.Whether PRE |
they were preconstitutional or a post constitutional laws,they would be repugnant to the AICTE Act passed by Parliament under Entry 66 of List PRE |
I.In the above case this Court referred to the various provisions of the AICTE Act and on the question of repugnancy held as follows PRE |
Hence on the subjects covered by the statute,the State could not make a law under Entry 25 of List III after the Forty-Second Amendment PRE |
If there was any such existing law immediately before the commencement of the Constitution within the meaning of Art.372 of the Constitution,as the Madras University Act 1923 on the enactment of the present Central Act,the provisions of the said law if repugnant to the provisions of the Central Act would stand impliedl... |
Such repugnancy would have to be adjudged on the basis of the tests which are applied for adjudging repugnancy u/art.254 of the Constitution PRE |
We shall now refer to the above judgment dealing with the question of 'approval' for establishing technical institutions under s.10(K) of the AICTE Act Ratio |
The Tamil Nadu Rules of 1976 made under the 1976 Act had no doubt excluded technical institutions from the purview of the Rules but this Court pointed out that the Rules were capable of being amended so as to extend to such technical institutions and that if they were so extended,the State Act of 1976 and the Rules wou... |
It was stated that inasmuch as the State Act, "will overlap and will be in conflict with the provisions of the Central Act in various areas Ratio |
granting approval for starting new technical institution Ratio |
inspection of technical institution ............which are matters covered by the Central Act Ratio |
This Court then referred to the Madras University Act,1923.It was held that s.10 of the Central Act dealt with various matters (including granting approval for starting new technical institutions),and that so far as these matters were concerned Ratio |
it is not the University Act and the University but it is the Central Act and the Council created under it which will have the jurisdiction Ratio |
To that extent,after the coming into force of the Central Act,the provisions of the University Act will be deemed to have become unenforceable Ratio |
Thus,in the two passages set out above,this Court clearly held that because of s.10(k) of the Central Act which vested the powers of granting approval in the Council,the T.N.Act of 1976 and the University Act,1923 could not deal with any questions of 'approval' for establishment of technical institutions Ratio |
All that was necessary was that under the Regulations,the AICTE Council had to consult them Ratio |
Statutory powers of the State of Kerala and the M.G.University Ratio |
The question is as to how far the judgment in the Tamil Nadu case is to be applied in the State of Kerala Ratio |
Learned Additional Solicitor General stated before us that there was no statute in the State of Kerala corresponding to the Tamil Nadu Act of 1976 nor any other law which specifically required the 'approval' of the State Government ARG |
It was however contended that the Tamil Nadu case was concerned only with the standards of education and as to who could fix them ARG |
We are not inclined to agree Ratio |
We have already pointed out under Point 1 that in the Tamil Nadu case,s.10(k) of the AICTE Act was referred to and the power of 'approval' for establishing a technical institution was considered,in our opinion,even if there was a State law in the State of Kerala which required the approval of the State Government for e... |
The only provision relied on before us by the State Government which according to its learned senior counsel,amounted to a statutory requirement of 'approval' of the State Government,was the one contained in cl.9(7) of the Kerala University First Statute STA |
It reads as follows : " Grant of affiliation : (1 STA |
After considering the report of the Commission and the report of the local inquiry,if any,and after making such further inquiry as it may deem necessary,the Syndicate shall decide,after ascer-taining the view of the Government also,whether the affiliation be granted or refused,either in whole or part STA |
In case affiliation is granted,the fact shall be reported to the Senate at its next meet-ing STA |
It will be noticed that cl.9(7) of the statute required that before the University took a decision on "affiliation",it had to ascertain the "views" of the State Government Ratio |
The reference to the Commission in the above cl.9(7) is to the Commission of Inspection appointed by the University Ratio |
Sub-cl.(1) of cl.(9) of the statute required "verification of the facilities that may exist for starting the new colleges/course".The Commission was to inspect the site,verify the title deeds as regards the proprietary right of the management over the land (and buildings,if any) offered,building accommodation provided,... |
As held in the Tamil Nadu case,the Central Act of 1987 and in particular,s.10(k) occupied the field relating the 'grant of approvals' for establishing technical institutions and the provisions of the Central Act alone were to be complied with Ratio |
So far as the provisions of the Mahatma Gandhi University Act or its statutes were concerned and in particular statute 9(7),they merely required the University to obtain the 'views' of the State Government Ratio |
That could not be characterised as requiring the "approval' of the State Government Ratio |
If,indeed,the University statute could be so inter-preted,such a provision requiring approval of the State Government would be repugnant to the provisions of s.10(k) of the AICTE Act,1987 and would again be void Ratio |
As pointed out in the Tamil Nadu case there were enough provisions in the Central Act for consultation by the Council of the AICTE with various agencies,including the State Governments and the Universities concerned Ratio |
The State Level Committee and the Central Regional Committees contained various experts and State representatives Ratio |
In case of difference of opinion as between the various consultees,the AICTE would have to go by the views of the Central Task Force Ratio |
These were sufficient safeguards for ascertaining the views of the State Governments and the Universities Ratio |
No doubt the question of affiliation was a different matter and was not covered by the Central Act but in the Tamil Nadu case,it was held that the University could not impose any conditions inconsistent with the AICTE Act or its Regulation or the conditions imposed by the AICTE.Therefore,the procedure for obtaining the... |
The University could not,therefore,in any event have sought for 'approval' of the State Government Ratio |
Thus we hold,in the present case that there was no statutory require-ment for obtaining the approval of the State Government and even if there was one,it would have been repugnant to the AICTE Act RPC |
The University statute 9(7) merely required that the 'views' of the State Government be obtained before granting affiliation and this did not amount to obtaining 'approval'.If the University statute required 'approval',it would have been repugnant to the AICTE Act Ratio |
Point 1 is decided accordingly Ratio |
Point 2 Ratio |
Factual position and pleadings in this case Ratio |
On facts,the position was that the AICTE had granted approval on 30.4.95 expressly stating that this was "on consideration of the observations made by the Expert Committee and the recommendations made by the Central Regional Committee,State Level Committee,Central Task Force as per the provisions of AICTE Regulations d... |
I to the order and the general conditions were enlisted in Annexure II.The FAC |
State Government was directed by the AICTE to announce admission in accordance with Regulation notified on 20.5.94 and based on the judgment of the Supreme Court in Unnikrishnan v FAC |
State of Andhra Pradesh,[1993] 1 SCC FAC |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.