Karnataka HC Rejects NLSIU's Challenge To UGC Regulation Which Restricts Territorial Jurisdiction Of Universities

The Karnataka High Court has refused to quash a public notice and regulations issued by University Grants Commission by which it restricts the physical jurisdiction of National Law School of India University (NLSIU), in the matter of distance education to within the State of Karnataka. The University has established examination centres at New Delhi, Kolkata and Pune. NLSIU had challenged the public notice dated 19.07.2016 and a communication dated 06.10.2016, issued by UGC and the University Grants Commission (Open and Distance Learning) Regulations, 2017. The regulations provide that a University which is established or incorporated by or under a State Act shall operate only within the territorial jurisdiction allotted to it under the Act and in no case it shall operate beyond the territory of the State where it is located. A single bench of Justice R Devdas on (May 19), disposed of the petition leaving it to the University to approach the UGC seeking a declaration as 'Institutions of Eminence Deemed to be Universities'. In terms of the University Grants Commission (Institutions of Eminence Deemed to be Universities) Regulations, 2017, provisions are made for creating a distinct category of Institutions of Eminence Deemed to be Universities, which would have the benefit of establishing Off-campus centres and Offshore campus. Submission for NLSIU Senior Advocate Aditya Sondhi appearing for the University submitted that by placing a restriction on the territorial jurisdiction, the UGC has violated the right of the petitioner under Articles 14 and 19 (1)(g) and the Right to Education under Article 21-A of the Constitution of India. He contended that "When there was no restriction of the territorial jurisdiction under the Act by which the petitioner-University is established, the same cannot be imposed upon the petitioner by the UGC. It is by now well established that UGC is established under an Act of the Parliament for maintenance of standard of education in the country, but the impugned public notice, communication and Regulations, 2017 travel beyond the powers of the UGC. Further, he said "Such restriction is inconsistent with the object and nature of distance education. Moreover, the University has not established any study centre beyond Karnataka and neither overseas. On the contrary, the University has only established examination centres at New Delhi, Kolkata and Pune, other than Bengaluru. It was therefore contended that "It is beyond the powers of the UGC to place restrictions on the petitioner-University directing it not to conduct examinations in the examination centers which are beyond the territories of the State where the University is established." Reliance was placed on the decision of a Division Bench of the high court in the case of Master Balachandar Krishnan Vs. The State of Karnataka and Others (25 percent domicile reservation for State of Karnataka Students) decided on 29.09.2020. It was submitted that the bench has held that although the petitioner-University is indicated to be a State University, it is only for the purpose of making grants to the University by construing it to be a University established by a State enactment. But, the said fact would not make the petitioner-University a State University, as contended by the learned Advocate General. It was also held that although the petitioner-University may not be an institution of national importance or Institution of Eminence as per the Central Government, but it is, nevertheless, a national level institution. Submission of UGC: Advocate Showri HR appearing for UGC attention of this Court to the larger Bench decision of the Apex Court in the case of Prof. Yashpal and Another Vs. State of Chhattisgarh and Others, reported in (2005) 5 SCC 420, where it was held that establishment of a University conferring the legal status, but lacking in all the basic requirements, is clearly contrary to the constitutional scheme and is not contemplated by Article 246 of the Constitution. The power of the UGC in reigning in such violations and to ensure the standards of learning are maintained, has been upheld by the Apex Court. Further, reliance was placed on the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Annamalai University Vs. Secretary to Government, Information and Tourism Department and Others, reported in (2009) 4 SCC 590, in the matter of distance education and the powers and functions of the UGC in such matters, is also pressed into service. Finally it was submitted that on establishment of the UGC (Institutions of Eminence Deemed to be Universities) Regulations, 2017, the UGC has made provision to create a distinct category of Deemed to be Universities, called 'Institutions of Eminence Deemed to be Universities' which would be regulated differently from other Deemed to be Universities so as to evolve into institutions of world class in a ...

Karnataka HC Rejects NLSIU's Challenge To UGC Regulation Which Restricts Territorial Jurisdiction Of Universities

Mustafa Plumber

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Mustafa Plumber

Karnataka HC Rejects NLSIU's Challenge To UGC Regulation Which Restricts Territorial Jurisdiction Of Universities

Mustafa Plumber

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Mustafa Plumber

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers