In a recent Supreme Court ruling, the case between AICTE and an educational institution regarding excess admissions and penalties was discussed. The AICTE imposed penalties on the institution for admitting students beyond the sanctioned seats. The institution’s actions led to a penalty of Rs.23,10,00,000/- for violating guidelines. Let’s delve deeper into the details of this significant legal matter.
Facts
- The petitioner applied for extension of approval and increase in seats to the AICTE.
- AICTE granted extension of approval for existing seats but did not address the request for seat increase.
- Despite not having permission for increased seats, the petitioner admitted students in excess of sanctioned seats.
- A penalty of Rs.23,10,00,000/- was imposed by AICTE for excess admissions.
- The petitioner filed a writ petition to challenge the penalty and requested to continue the current academic session.
- AICTE to verify the eligibility of students based on merit
- AICTE Inspection Team to conduct another inspection to check for deficiencies
- Petitioner-Institution to cooperate with the Inspection Team
- Petitioner-Institution to deposit Rs. 2 crores with the Court
Also Read: Succession of Properties: Rule of Primogeniture vs. Law of Rulership
Arguments
- Mr. Shekhar Naphade, learned senior counsel for the petitioner, argued that an affidavit had been submitted detailing the removal of deficiencies before the session begins.
- The inaction of AICTE in responding to the petitioner’s request for increased seats was deemed arbitrary by Mr. Naphade.
- The reasons cited for not allowing the increase in course intake were considered illegal by Mr. Naphade.
- He emphasized that the imposed penalty was excessive and arbitrary, especially when the Court was already handling the matter.
- AICTE had a zero deficiency policy, particularly for students coming from abroad
- Penalty imposed in compliance with the Approval Process Handbook (2016-2017) of the AICTE
- Statutory committees were not established by the deadline as per the case of Parshvanath Charitable Trust v. AICTE
- Petitioner’s case was rejected due to non-compliance with committee set-up requirements
Also Read: Enforcement of Foreign Award: Case of Oscar Investments Limited and RHC Holding Private Limited
Analysis
- The petitioner institution admitted students beyond the number permitted by the AICTE.
- The institution should have approached the Court if they felt AICTE was unfair, instead of making illegal admissions.
- AICTE provided penalties in case of excess admissions in the Approval Process Handbook.
- The imposed penalty by AICTE was financial and in accordance with the Handbook.
- The penalty included levying five times the total fees collected per student for excess admissions.
- Other penalties included suspension of approval for supernumerary seats, reduction in sanctioned intake, no admission status for one academic year, and withdrawal of approval for program/course.
- AICTE imposed a penalty of Rs.23,10,00,000/- on the petitioner for violation of Clause 3.1 of Approval Process Handbook.
- AICTE has no discretion to award a lesser penalty and could have imposed multiple penalties.
- Students who had paid large sums of money should not be made to suffer as a result of the penalty imposed on the petitioner.
Also Read: NGOs Substantial Financing Case: Supreme Court’s Judgment on Public Authority Definition
Decision
- The degrees are directed to be awarded to the students who have completed the course.
- The amount of Rs.4,00,00,000/- already deposited will be adjusted towards the penalty.
- The petitioner must deposit the remaining balance of Rs.19,10,00,000/- with the AICTE within 8 weeks.
- If the balance amount is not deposited, AICTE can take appropriate legal action.
Case Title: FOUNDATION FOR ORGANIZATIONAL RESEARCH AND EDUCATION FORE SCHOOL OF MANAGEMENT THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR Vs. THE ALL INDIA COUNCIL FOR TECHNICAL EDUCATION THROUGH THE MEMBER SECRETARY
Case Number: W.P.(C) No.-000581-000581 / 2016
