NEW DELHI : On June 21 the Supreme Court upheld a penalty of
Rs 23.10 crore imposed on FORE School of Management by the AICTE for
admitting 42 students in excess to the sanctioned seats in 2016,
reports PTI.
The order was made by a vacation bench of justices Deepak Gupta
and Surya Kant who said that it is not setting aside the admission
of the students because that action would be too harsh upon them and
that they should not suffer for the totally illegal action of the
institute.
The court said it has been noticed that the educational
institutions admit students beyond the numbers permitted putting the
future of the students at stake.
"Time and again, this court has noticed that the educational
institutions admit students beyond the numbers permitted putting the
future of the students at stake," it said.
"In the present case, we are not setting aside the admission of
the students because that action would be too harsh upon the
students who should not suffer for the totally illegal action of the
petitioner institution."
The bench said that even if it assumes that the decision of the
AICTE was not correct, the institution had no business to admit
students beyond the number permitted by the AICTE.
It said even if the institution felt that the AICTE was delaying
the matter or was not acting fairly, the proper course for the
petitioner was to have approached this court and prayed for
appropriate relief.
The petitioner, Foundation for Organizational Research and Education
Fore School of Management is a registered educational institution
running courses in management. It is situated in South Delhi area
here.
The bench said that the AICTE which had many prescribed
penalties had only imposed the financial penalty which is the first
penalty prescribed.
It noted that the management institute was charging Rs 11 lakh
from each student for the entire course and the AICTE, according to
laid down norms, had imposed penalty five times of the amount
charged from each student, which in the case for 42 students works
out to be Rs 23.10 crore.
"The AICTE has no discretion to award a lesser penalty and, in
fact, the petitioner has been let off lightly since only one penalty
has been imposed whereas the AICTE could have imposed more than one
penalty prescribed," the bench said.
It allowed the institute to adjust Rs 4 crore already deposited
with the court in the penalty and directed balance amount of Rs
19.10 crore be deposited with the All India Council of Technical
Education (AICTE) within eight weeks.
On March 15, 2016, the institute had applied to the AICTE, for
extension of approval of existing seats and for increase in seats in
certain courses.
The AICTE had on April 25, granted extension of approval for the
existing seats in the existing courses but said nothing about
approval to increase in seats.
On June 22, 2016, the AICTE rejected the request of the
institute to increase the number of seats in certain courses it
offers.
However, the management institute admitted students in access to
the sanctioned seats despite having no permission for them.
It filed a writ petition in the Supreme Court seeking to quash
the June 22, 2016 decision of the AICTE refusing to accede to the
request of increasing the number of seats saying that it be allowed
to continue with increased seats for the academic year without
jeopardizing the career of the students who had already been
admitted.
The court had then asked the institute to deposit Rs 2 crores
each on two occasions till its case is being adjudicated and allowed
to AICTE to inspect the institute to ascertain whether there exists
any deficiencies.
During the pendency of the petition in the apex court, the AICTE
imposed a penalty of Rs 23.10 crore towards the excess admission of
42 students.
The institute in the apex court contended that inaction of the
AICTE in not responding to the request for increase in seats was
itself an arbitrary action and the reasons given for not permitting
increase in the intake in the courses was totally illegal.
It had contended that when the apex court was seized of the
matter the AICTE could not impose penalty which is highly excessive
and arbitrary.
The AICTE on other hand contended that the penalty has been
imposed strictly in accordance with the Approval Process Handbook
(20162017) of the council.
U-turn by MHRD, engg entrance test put on hold
By Rajiv Shukla
NEW DELHI : Just 80 days after it told the All India Council for
Technical Education (AICTE)
to hold a NEET-type all-India test for admission to undergraduate
engineering and architecture courses, the Ministry of Human Resource
Development (MHRD) took a U-turn on April 28 and directed the AICTE
to put the process on hold.
A senior official of the AICTE told this correspondent :
“The common entrance test has been put on hold in view of
differences with some states."
According to information available the move has been shelved
particularly because of West Bengal's dogged resistance and the delicate political
relations with West Bengal.
“While some states have their own entrance tests, some take the
Class-12 marks as the criterion for admission,” the AICTE official
said referring to Bengal and Tamil Nadu.
“Till these differences are ironed out and the Centre and states
brought on the same page, we have decided to put on hold a common
entrance test”, he said.
The Central Board of Secondary Education conducts the Joint Entrance
Examination-Mains for admission to engineering courses. A number of
states conduct their own tests, while some colleges grant admission
based on marks. Several private colleges also have their own
entrance examinations.
The directive
It may be recalled that the AICTE had
in mid February this year
decided to
hold an all-India test for admission to the undergraduate
engineering and architecture courses from 2018 following a directive
to it from the MHRD on February 10.
The directive from the MHRD had come after it
had overruled objections from Bengal and
Tamil Nadu and told the AICTE to go ahead with
an all-India engineering admission exam to admit students to eight
lakh B.Tech seats across 3,400 colleges in the country.
The states were, however, given
the leeway to admit students to
their engineering colleges solely on the basis of the merit in the
all-India exam or to give some weightage to their board marks too.
This would have been the third incarnation of
the all-India engineering admission test the first being AIEEE and
the second being the JEE (Mains).
History
The all-India engineering admission
test was first introduced in 2002 when Dr Murli Manohar Joshi was
the union HRD minister. Named All India Engineering Entrance
Examination (AIEEE), the Central Board of Secondary Education was
made the nodal body to conduct the test. All private and government
engineering colleges in the country were given option to pick
students from the merit list of the exam, including the National Institutes of
Technology (NITs). The AIEEE, the first avatar of the pan-India exam lasted
10 years and was superseded by what was called Joint Entrance
Examination (Main) in 2013.
Under the JEE (Main), being conducted by the
CBSE, the
states are allowed to hold their own admission tests or to admit
students on the basis of their board scores. The JEE (Main) has survived
for five years.
Bengal, TN exceptions
About 90 engineering colleges in Bengal admit some 21,000
undergraduate students on the basis of their performance in the West
Bengal Joint Entrance Examination. Bengal government argued that its state-level
exam was conducted very well and did not need to be replaced by a
national-level test.
Similarly the undergraduate engineering students in Tamil Nadu are admitted on the
basis of their Class XII board marks. The state's 533 undergraduate
engineering colleges have 1.6 lakh seats.
The Tamil Nadu government had contended that the state board's Class
XII science syllabus was not on a par with that taught by the
Central Board of Secondary Education.
Tamil Nadu also expressed apprehensions that its reservation volumes
- different from the national quota break-up - could be affected if
admissions were regulated by a national entrance exam.
AICTE head office gets it's home in Vasant Kunj
By Rajiv Shukla
NEW DELHI : Nearly 30 years after it was established
in 1988, the All India Council for
Technical Education (AICTE) had a building of its own in south west
corner of the national capital. It was inaugurated by Union Minister
of State (HRD) Upendra Kushwaha in Vasant Kunj on Nelson Mandela
Marg here on August 12.
After its split from the UGC under the
leadership of a suave and a magnificent manoeuvrist,
Prof
S K Khanna the AICTE opened its first office in a modest
apartment in South Extension II in 1993. After a couple of years it
moved to a more spacious building in IG Stadium near ITO.
The IG stadium abode that was promised
to be temporary, stayed with the AICTE for over 20 years during
which the apex regulatory body of the technical education in the
country saw the maximum expansion and maximum lure. About seven
years ago it had to shift to 7th Floor, Chanderlok Building Janpath,
New Delhi-110 001.
It's new office on Nelson Mandela Marg
has been designed and constructed by the DRDO. Spread over 5 acres
with 37,500 sq.mt constructed area the office building has G+3
floors with three wings having a seating capacity of 300 employees
and 17 conference rooms, an 800 capacity auditorium, a 20 room guest
house and canteen for staff and officers. The built-up area is 19500
sqm and parking space of 18000 sqm making it a total built-up area
of 37500 sqm in the premises.
A PIB press note said that henceforth
the AICTE will work from the new Headquarters.
Inaugurating the office building Mr
Upendra Kushwaha stressed the importance of AICTE in cultivating
technology and technical education in the country.
Mr V.S Oberoi, Secretary (Higher Education) MHRD and Mr R.
Subrahmanyam, Additional Secretary (Technical Education) also spoke
on the occasion. Dr. S. Christopher, Secretary (R&D), Dept of
Defence and DG, DRDO and Dr G. Satheesh Reddy, Scientific Advisor to
Minister of Defence also graced the occasion. Dr Anil D
Sahastrabudhe, Chairman, AICTE welcomed the guests.
Temporary relief to AICTE, SC restores powers
By Rajiv Shukla
NEW DELHI : On April 17 a demoralised All India Council for
Technical Education (AICTE) was granted a temporary reprieve by a
division bench of the Supreme Court here allowing it to retain its
regulatory authority over technical education in the country for the
academic year 2014-15.
The interim relief came on a SLP (SLP(C)No.7277/2014) filed
by Orissa Technical Colleges Association which was taken up on April
17 by a division bench of the apex court comprising Justice R M
Lodha and Justice Kurian Joseph.
In its interim order the bench allowed the AICTE to retain its
domain over technical education in the country for the year 2014-15
in accordance with the norms laid down in the AICTE’s Approval
Process Handbook.
In its order the bench said : “In the counter affidavit filed on
behalf of respondent No.1,i.e., All India Council for Technical
Education (AICTE), it is stated that Approval Process Handbook
(2013-14) is presently in force and the same has been extended and
made applicable for the Academic Year 2014-15 as well.
AICTE shall now proceed in accordance with the Approval Process
Handbook for the Academic Year 2014-15 insofar as the members of the
petitioner Association and all colleges and institutions situated
similarly to the members of the petitioner Association are concerned
and necessary orders shall be issued by AICTE within ten days.
Prayer for interim relief is ordered accordingly.”
The interim relief came almost a year
after the Supreme Court had, on April 25 2013,
held that
the AICTE
did not have any control and supervision over affiliated colleges of
their respective universities.
“The applicability of bringing the
university as defined under clause 2 (f) of the UGC Act includes the
institution deemed to be a university under Section 3 of the said
Act and therefore, the affiliated colleges are excluded from the
purview of technical institution definition of the AICTE Act,” the
Bench held.
The ruling was given by Justices BS Chauhan and V Gopala Gowda
who said while
allowing the appeal in the
Association of Management of Private Colleges
vs All India Council for Technical Education and others.
(Civil Appeal No. 1145 of 2004).
The case came as a second big blow
after the
Bharathidasan University & Ans vs AICTE & Ors case
delivered on September 24, 2001.
The landmark case
had sliced
off
all universities and deemed universities from the ambit of the
AICTE Act triggering off a rat race for the deemed university status
in the country.
Business management no tech edu
course : SC
From Rajiv Shukla
NEW DELHI : Over two decades after the establishment of the All
India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) the Supreme Court on
April 25 corrected a major flaw in AICTE's technical education
definition --
it declared that the business management studies ought to be part of
humanities.
“We hold that MBA course is not a
technical course within the definition of the AICTE Act,” a Bench
comprising Justices BS Chauhan and V Gopala Gowda ruled while
allowing the appeal in the
Association of Management of Private Colleges
vs All India Council for Technical Education and others.
(Civil Appeal No. 1145 of 2004)
The Apex Court struck down the
amendment made to the
AICTE Act in 2000 inserting words
“MBA and MCA” before Architecture and Hotel Management courses as
the amended regulations were not placed on the floor of the Houses
of Parliament as required under Section 24 of the AICTE Act.
The appeal had argued that the AICTE
Act being an enactment of Parliament could not be amended in year
2000 without being placed in the Parliament. This argument was
accepted by the Court to knock off AICTE's jurisdiction.
“As per definition of ‘technical
education’ under Section 2 (g) of the AICTE Act and non production
of any material by the AICTE to show that MBA course is a technical
education, we hold that MBA course is not a technical course within
the definition of the AICTE Act,” the bench said.
However, Master of Computer
Applications (MCA) fell under the technical education category, but
for regulating the course, the role of AICTE must be advisory. “The
relief sought for in the writ petitions is granted and there is no
need to seek approval from the AICTE for MBA and MCA courses,” the
Supreme Court held.
The court also ruled that the AICTE
did not have any control and supervision over affiliated colleges of
their respective universities. “The applicability of bringing the
university as defined under clause 2 (f) of the UGC Act includes the
institution deemed to be a university under Section 3 of the said
Act and therefore, the affiliated colleges are excluded from the
purview of technical institution definition of the AICTE Act,” the
Bench held.
The bench held that though MCA was a
technical course, the AICTE had no business to lay down standards as
for this purpose the Parliament had already enacted the UGC Act.
Moreover, the role of AICTE was advisory and could only impose
uniform standards of education in affiliated members of a university
by putting a note to the UGC, the bench said.
The case has come as a second big blow
after the
Bharathidasan University & Ans vs AICTE & Ors case
delivered on September 24, 2001.
The landmark case
had sliced
off
all universities and deemed universities from the ambit of the
AICTE Act triggering off a rat race for the deemed university status
in the country.
Private, public companies can set
up
technical colleges, Parliament told
NEW DELHI ; On November 27 the government told Parliament
that all private and public limited companies with a turnover of
over Rs 100 crore for the past three consecutive years will now be
allowed to set up technical colleges.
In response to a related query on the subject, Minister of State for
Human Resource Development Shashi Tharoor said that the decision had
been taken by the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE)
in view of the lack of skills among the passouts who graduate from
the engineering colleges.
A PIB press note said that the new rule would be applicable from
next year. “The AICTE has allowed from 2013-14 private limited or
public limited companies/industries having a turnover of at least Rs
100 crore per year for previous three years to establish new
technical institutions in engineering and technology, pharmacy,
architecture, town planning, hotel management and catering
technology,” Tharoor said in a written reply.
There are several reports by industry based organizations commenting
on the lack of adequate skills in the technical education imparted
to the students and hence less employability. Therefore, AICTE has
reviewed the curriculum and has come up with model curriculum to
involve industry best practices. The model curriculum is available
on the AICTE website.
AICTE has further proposed scheme of setting up of research park
with the industry in certain good institutions where AICTE will fund
up to one crore of a rupees along with matching grant from the
industry. It is expected that the institute will provide about 350
to 500 Sq. Mtr. of area within the campus to the industry to set up
research extension facility within the institute. This facility
would provide the students to work on live projects and faculty to
participate with the industry experts for the same whereas the
industry also would benefit from the faculty expertise.
AICTE also promotes entrepreneurship development with the industry.
Further AICTE funds industry institute partnership cell to be set up
within the institutions. Further AICTE promotes innovation
promotions within the institutes based on the requirement of the
industry through its students of technical institutions and funds
such projects.
Rajiv Shukla
adds
The entry, initially has been allowed to benign
companies defined under section 25 of the Companies Act,
1956 -- and in only 241 districts where currently no
AICTE Institution exists -- giving profiteers a fair
hint to wait and watch.
Besides, the corporates
have been allowed to
set up campuses through PPP or through
build-operate-transfer mode under agreement with public
sector. Like all other companies, the educational
institutions set up by the benign companies will be
regulated by the
ministry of corporate affairs.
Till now only registered
Trusts and Societies were allowed to establish technical
education institutions in the country -- this was to keep
business coporates at bay.
The announcement of this crucial decision was made by
the Union Human Resource Development Minister Kapil
Sibal on behalf of the All India Council for Technical
Education (AICTE) on December 30, 2011.
“We will henceforth allow
companies registered as non-profit entities under
Section 25 of the Companies Act 1956 to establish
technical institutions to allow good corporates to set
up institutions. However, no joint venture can apply for
this,” Sibal had announced.
Corporate houses have been
demanding such a provision for a long time, saying it is
much easier to function as a Section 25 company than as
a trust or society.
Announcing a major
relaxation in the AICTE norms the minister had declared
that in rural sector, only 10 acre will be required to
set up an engineering institute while in urban sector
only 2.5 acre -- obviously indicating a vertical
construction module for the technical education
institutions.
The AICTE has also
modified the approval norms under which institutes could
offer stand-alone postgraduate programme. Under the
existing norms PG courses were allowed only on campuses
that offered undergraduate programmes. However now the
AICTE has allowed stand-alone PG institutes as well.
Sibal said B.Sc students
could seek lateral entry to a second-year B.Tech degree
programme provided they had mathematics at Class XII or
at the BSc level.
Tech courses through distance edu
invalid: HC
From Our Correspondent
CHANDIGARH : On November 6 the Punjab and Haryana high court
ruled that there is no specific power or function of the Distance
Education Council (DEC) to impart technical education through the
distance education mode.
The order came from a division bench comprising justice Hemant Gupta
and justice Rajiv Narain Raina in
Kartar Singh
vs Union of India case while deciding a bunch of 148
petitions.
A public interest litigation on the matter was first filed by one
Kartar Singh seeking directions to the authorities concerned to stop
the illegal educational institutions imparting degrees in
professional/technical courses through distance education and take
action against the centres established beyond the territorial
jurisdiction of such institutions.
In its 160-page detailed judgment, the bench said, “Though the court
is sympathetic with the cause of students, but the larger public
interest demands that the students who have not got formal technical
education should not be considered eligible for appointment under
the state.”
The bench mainly decided in respect of technical/professional
courses imparted through the distance education mode by Vinayaka
Mission’s Research Foundation, Salem in Tamil Nadu; IASE Gandhi
Vidya Mandir, Sardar Shahar in Rajasthan; JRN Vidyapeeth, Udaipur,
in Rajasthan, and Allahabad Agriculture Research Institute in Uttar
Pradesh. “We hold that the approval granted by the Distance
Education Council, dated August 29, 2007, to the institutes in
question is illegal and unwarranted and beyond the scope of
authority vested in it,” the bench said.
"We hold that the deemed to be
universities have started courses in technical education in
violation of the guidelines, instructions, circulars and regulations
framed by the commission not only with starting such courses, but
also in establishing study centres outside their territorial limits
and in subjects for which they were not granted
deemed-to-be-university status.
Therefore, degrees awarded by such deemed to be universities is an
illegal act and such illegality cannot be removed or cured by the
actions of either the commission or the Distance Education Council,"
it said.
“As a necessary consequence, degrees granted by such deemed-to-be
universities are illegal and candidates can’t be deemed to be
qualified in purported subjects in the absence of approval from the
University Grants Commission,” the bench observed.
The Bench held that the approval
granted by the Distance Education Council on August 29, 2007, to
some institutes was illegal, unwarranted and beyond the scope of
authority vested in it.
The Bench held that a deemed to be
university was not on a par with a university incorporated by a
Central or state statute. Both, however, are competent to award
degrees.
Also, a deemed to be university "can
start a study centre outside the headquarters in areas where there
is a reasonable concentration of students. But such a centre cannot
be established beyond the territorial limits represented at the time
of grant of such status in the MoA, except with the permission of
the University Grants Commission and the state
government, where such study centre is to be located," the Bench
observed.
It also stated that the certificate/diploma course in multipurpose
health was meant to be approved by the Indian Nursing Council, the
State Nursing Council or the All-India Technical Council. “Since the
course is not approved by the Commission or by any other statutory
authority, the qualification/ diploma granted by a deemed-to-be
university will not make such candidate eligible for appointment,”
the bench said.
The bench also set aside an earlier judgment of a single-judge bench
of the high court which had held that a degree in engineering
obtained through distance education mode was a valid degree for the
purpose of public appointments.
In case of the Associate Member of the Institution of Engineers (AMIE),
the bench said, “Qualification of AMIE is relevant for the purposes
of promotion and not for direct recruitment, as an associate member
becomes eligible for membership only if he is engaged in the
engineering profession.”
AICTE wakes up,
plans BE-MBA composite course
From Our Correspondent
NEW DELHI : Waking up late -- very late -- the
All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE)
announced on April 12 that it would launch an
integrated programme from this academic session
that will give engineers with management skills.
The five-and-a-half year long integrated
management programme will also be available for
those aspiring to hold a managerial position in
the field of
architecture, pharmacy or hotel management.
Students will be admitted to the course through
the
Common Management Admission Test (CMAT).
The basic qualification for appearing in the
test will be 10+2.
It will be a
flexible programme which will provide an
undergraduate degree in 3 or 4 years followed by
a Master’s degree in five years. Apart from this
a five year dual degree management course will
also commence from this academic session.
The AICTE move has
come very late as more and more colleges are
closing down their engineering and postgraduate
management programme for want of students. "Had
the integrated programme come five years ago, it
would have clicked well", says an education
expert.
“We will soon issue a
notification in this regard,” officiating AICTE
chairman S S Mantha said.
In the first four years of the programme,
students will complete their course in the
respective discipline opted by them. Thereafter,
they would seamlessly proceed to undergo one and
a half year duration management course.
“After completion of integrated course, those
from engineering will get a degree in integrated
engineering management programme, architecture a
degree in integrated architect management
programme, and likewise in the case of pharmacy
and hotel management,” Mantha said.
Apart from this, the AICTE is also set to launch
a dual degree five year duration management
programme from this academic session. The basic
qualification required for admission to the
programme will be 10+2. The students will be
admitted to the programme through an entrance
test, date of which is yet to be decided by the
AICTE.
“A student can take to a job after completing
his three- year bachelor programme in management
or he can continue one year of the masters
programme,” Mantha said.