Delhi High Court Asked UGC To Take Action Against College Offering Unspecified Degrees


The Delhi High Court in the case Rahul Mahajan v. Ministry of Education And Ors observed and has directed the University Grants Commission, UGC in order to take necessary action against the varsities and colleges offering unspecified degrees and ensure compliance of law which includes the penal provisions on the issue.
The Division bench comprising of Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Sanjeev Narula in the case observed that the purpose of providing specification of degrees approved by UGC is to maintain uniformity in the standards of education.
The court in the case stated that the degrees of the students who are studying studying unspecified degree courses would render such unspecified degrees unrecognised by the University Grants Commission, UGC.
It has also been stated by the bench that the UGC is competent within its powers to take appropriate action against those universities and colleges which are offering unspecified degrees, thus, adding that such institutions are liable for penalty as stated under Section 24 of the University Grants Commission Act, 1956.
The court in the case observed and has disposed of the public interest litigation moved by one Rahul Mahajan against the failure of UGC to take action against institutions providing unspecified courses to students.
It has been submitted by Mahajan before the court that there being the lack of effective implementation of the rules and regulations on the issue in hand by UGC.
Therefore, he seeks an independent committee of retired judges to inquire into and fix accountability into the system failure which results in large scale conferment of unspecified degrees.
It has also been noted by the bench the UGC’s stand that any violation of law and its directions by the universities or colleges which are offering degrees not specified would render such unspecified degrees as unrecognised by the statutory body.
The said court is of the view that no order is being required to be passed in the present writ petition. Thus, the UGC in the case observed and has directed in order to take appropriate necessary actions to ensure compliance of the provisions of the UGC Act, 1956. The bench in the case observed and stated that the that UGC is taking all necessary measures in order to ensure strict compliance of the UGC Act, 1956, with regard to specification of degree. The court stated that the Act was being enacted to make provisions for the coordination and determination of standards in universities. Thus, the University Grants Commission, UGC under the Act has been entrusted with the duty to take such steps as it may deem fit for the promotion and co-ordination of the university education and for the determination and maintenance of the standards of teaching, examination, and research in universities.
The counsel, Advocate Vikram Singh Kushwaha appeared for the petitioner.
The counsel, Advocate Manoj Ranjan Sinha and Advocate Deepak Sain represented the respondents.