# PRANEETH K. AND ORS v. UNIVERSITY GRANTS COMMISSION (UGC) AND ORS

- **Citation:** [2020] 8 S.C.R. 917
- **Court:** Supreme Court of India
- **Decided:** 2020-08-28
- **Bench:** Ashok Bhushan, R. Subhash Reddy, M. R. Shah
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/supreme-court-of-india/praneeth-k-and-ors-v-university-grants-commission-ugc-and-ors-34859
- **Pages:** 80

## Headnote

Education/Educational Institutions:
Guidelines dated 06.07.2020, issued by University Grants
Commission (UGC) - Directing the Universities/ Colleges to complete
terminal semester/ final year examinations by 30.9.2020 - Ministry
of Human Resource Development by OM dated 06.07.2020
formulated SOP for conducting the examinations as per the UGC
Guidelines which was settled by Ministry of Health and Family
Welfare - Ministry of Home Affairs permitting to conduct the
examination - State of Maharashtra as well as Maharashtra State
Disaster Management Authority, in view of situation due to pandemic
COVID-19 took decision not to hold examination for the final year
courses and to promote the students on the basis of previous
performance and internal assessment of the students - Writ Petition
challenging the UGC Guidelines and the Orders of Ministries being
ultra vires Arts. 14 and 21 of the Constitution - Orders of State of
Maharashtra and State Disaster Management Authority also
challenged - Held: The UGC Guidelines are statutory having been
issued in exercise of power u/s. 12 of the UGC Act - They are not
beyond the domain of UGC as they relate to co-ordination and
determination of standards of education in institutions of higher
education - The Guidelines are in compliance with s. 12 of UGC
Act - They are neither unreasonable nor arbitrary and hence not
violative of Art. 14 - SOP for conducting the examinations shows
that UGC and the ministries are fully concerned with the health of
all the stakeholders and hence the Guidelines are not violative of
Art. 21 - The UGC Guidelines being referable to UGC Act, 1956
which was enacted in reference to Entry 66 of List I of VII Schedule,
shall have precedence as compared to any decision taken by the
State - Therefore, the decision of the State and Disaster Management
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
918
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2020] 8 S.C.R.
Committee to promote Final year/ terminal semester examination
being not within domain of Disaster Management Act and being
contrary to guidelines issued under Central enactment, cannot be
upheld - However the OM and letter of Central Government
permitting for holding the examination shall not fetter the power of
the State Disaster management Authority to take appropriate
measures to contain the pandemic - Hence, UGC Guidelines in so
far as it directs holding of examination by 30.09.2020 shall be
overridden by any contrary decision taken under Disaster
Management Act, 2005 - The State is at liberty to seek extention of
deadline of 30.09.2020 - Constitution of India - Arts. 14 and 21
VII Schedule List I Entry 66; List II Entry 25 - University Grants
Commission Act, 1956 - s. 12 - Disaster Management Act, 2005.
University Grants Commission Act, 1956:
s. 12 - Interpretation of - Expression 'other bodies' used in
opening part of the Section, would not include State Disaster
Management Authority or health experts - It is not mandatory duty
of University Grants Commission to consult with the Universities or
other bodies concerned, in all cases - The expression "in
consultation with Universities or other bodies concerned" has to
be read to mean where consultation is necessary.
Disposing of the matters, the Court
HELD: 1.1. Education including university education, is a
concurrent subject where both State legislature as well as
Parliament have legislative competence. Entry 11 of List II of
Seventh Schedule of the Constitution, as existed prior to
Constitution (Forty-second Amendment) Act, 1976 as well as
Entry 25 of List III is subject to the provisions of Entry 66 of List
I, which is the Constitutional Scheme delineated by Seventh
Schedule of the Constitution of India. [Para 49][953-C-D]
Gujarat University and Anr. v. Shri Krishna Ranganath
Mudholkar and Ors. AIR 1963 SC 703 : [1963] Suppl.
SCR 112; Dr. Preeti Srivastava and Anr. v. State of M.P.
and Ors. (1999) 7 SCC 120; Dr. Sadhna Devi and Ors.
v. State of U.P. and Ors. (1997) 3 SCC 90 : [1997] 2
SCR 186 - followed.
A
B
C
D
E

## Text

_Characters 0–39,211 of 186,692. This is a partial read: ask again with offset=39211 for what follows._

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
917
917
[2020] 8 S.C.R. 917
PRANEETH K. AND ORS.
v.
UNIVERSITY GRANTS COMMISSION (UGC) AND ORS.
(Writ Petition (Civil) No. 724 of 2020)
AUGUST 28, 2020
[ASHOK BHUSHAN, R. SUBHASH REDDY AND
M. R. SHAH, JJ.]
Education/Educational Institutions:
Guidelines dated 06.07.2020, issued by University Grants
Commission (UGC) - Directing the Universities/ Colleges to complete
terminal semester/ final year examinations by 30.9.2020 - Ministry
of Human Resource Development by OM dated 06.07.2020
formulated SOP for conducting the examinations as per the UGC
Guidelines which was settled by Ministry of Health and Family
Welfare - Ministry of Home Affairs permitting to conduct the
examination - State of Maharashtra as well as Maharashtra State
Disaster Management Authority, in view of situation due to pandemic
COVID-19 took decision not to hold examination for the final year
courses and to promote the students on the basis of previous
performance and internal assessment of the students - Writ Petition
challenging the UGC Guidelines and the Orders of Ministries being
ultra vires Arts. 14 and 21 of the Constitution - Orders of State of
Maharashtra and State Disaster Management Authority also
challenged - Held: The UGC Guidelines are statutory having been
issued in exercise of power u/s. 12 of the UGC Act - They are not
beyond the domain of UGC as they relate to co-ordination and
determination of standards of education in institutions of higher
education - The Guidelines are in compliance with s. 12 of UGC
Act - They are neither unreasonable nor arbitrary and hence not
violative of Art. 14 - SOP for conducting the examinations shows
that UGC and the ministries are fully concerned with the health of
all the stakeholders and hence the Guidelines are not violative of
Art. 21 - The UGC Guidelines being referable to UGC Act, 1956
which was enacted in reference to Entry 66 of List I of VII Schedule,
shall have precedence as compared to any decision taken by the
State - Therefore, the decision of the State and Disaster Management
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
918
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2020] 8 S.C.R.
Committee to promote Final year/ terminal semester examination
being not within domain of Disaster Management Act and being
contrary to guidelines issued under Central enactment, cannot be
upheld - However the OM and letter of Central Government
permitting for holding the examination shall not fetter the power of
the State Disaster management Authority to take appropriate
measures to contain the pandemic - Hence, UGC Guidelines in so
far as it directs holding of examination by 30.09.2020 shall be
overridden by any contrary decision taken under Disaster
Management Act, 2005 - The State is at liberty to seek extention of
deadline of 30.09.2020 - Constitution of India - Arts. 14 and 21
VII Schedule List I Entry 66; List II Entry 25 - University Grants
Commission Act, 1956 - s. 12 - Disaster Management Act, 2005.
University Grants Commission Act, 1956:
s. 12 - Interpretation of - Expression 'other bodies' used in
opening part of the Section, would not include State Disaster
Management Authority or health experts - It is not mandatory duty
of University Grants Commission to consult with the Universities or
other bodies concerned, in all cases - The expression "in
consultation with Universities or other bodies concerned" has to
be read to mean where consultation is necessary.
Disposing of the matters, the Court
HELD: 1.1. Education including university education, is a
concurrent subject where both State legislature as well as
Parliament have legislative competence. Entry 11 of List II of
Seventh Schedule of the Constitution, as existed prior to
Constitution (Forty-second Amendment) Act, 1976 as well as
Entry 25 of List III is subject to the provisions of Entry 66 of List
I, which is the Constitutional Scheme delineated by Seventh
Schedule of the Constitution of India. [Para 49][953-C-D]
Gujarat University and Anr. v. Shri Krishna Ranganath
Mudholkar and Ors. AIR 1963 SC 703 : [1963] Suppl.
SCR 112; Dr. Preeti Srivastava and Anr. v. State of M.P.
and Ors. (1999) 7 SCC 120; Dr. Sadhna Devi and Ors.
v. State of U.P. and Ors. (1997) 3 SCC 90 : [1997] 2
SCR 186 - followed.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
919
Professor Yashpal and Anr. v. State of Chhattisgarh and
Ors. (2005) 5 SCC 420 : [2005] 2 SCR 23; Maa Vaishno
Devi Mahila Mahavidyalaya v. State of Uttar Pradesh
and Ors. (2013) 2 SCC 617 : [2012] 13 SCR 810relied on.
1.2 Section 12 of University Grants Commission Act, 1956
enumerates the functions of University Grants Commission and
provides that it shall be the general duty of the Commission to
take, in consultation with the Universities or other bodies
concerned, all such steps as it may think fit for the promotion
and co-ordination of University education and for the
determination and maintenance of standards of teaching,
examination and research in Universities. The use of expression
"examination" in Section 12 itself makes it clear that steps taken
by the UGC under Section 12 may relate to the "examination as
well". The standards of education in an institution depends on
various factors, one of which includes "the standard of
examinations held including the manner in which the papers are
set and examined". Therefore, the Guidelines dated 06.07.2020
are not beyond the domain of the UGC and they relate to coordination and determination of standards in institutions of higher
education. [Paras 57 and 62][960-H; 961-A-B; 962-H]
Modern Dental College and Research Centre and Others
v. State of Madhya Pradesh and Others (2016) 7 SCC
353 : [2016] 3 SCR 579 - held inapplicable.
1.3 UGC being an expert body is entrusted with duty to
take such steps as it may think fit for the determination and
maintenance of standards of teaching, examination and research
in the University. In academic matters unless there is a clear
statutory violation, this Court shall keep their hands off since
the issues fall within the domain of the experts. [Paras 54 and
55][959-C, F]
University Grants Commission and Anr. v. Neha Anil
Bobde (Gadekar) (2013) 10 SCC 519 - relied on.
2.1 The Guidelines dated 29.04.2020 contains academic
calendar suggested for the academic session 2019-2020 and dates
for conduct of examinations were also suggested as 01.07.2020
PRANEETH K. AND ORS. v. UNIVERSITY GRANTS
COMMISSION (UGC) AND ORS.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
920
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2020] 8 S.C.R.
to 31.07.2020. It is true that Guidelines mentioned that
Guidelines are advisory in nature and each University may chart
out its plan of action taking into consideration the issues
pertaining to pandemic COVID-19. A reading of the Guidelines
indicate that ample latitude was given to the Universities to
conduct terminal/intermediate/ semester year examinations in
offline and online mode. The Guidelines, however, cannot be read
to mean that Guidelines dated 29.04.2020 left it to the wisdom of
the Universities to either conduct terminal semester/final year
examinations or not to conduct, which is clear from clauses 4 and
5 of the Guidelines, under the heading "Examinations". The
Guidelines dated 29.04.2020 was issued for a purpose and object
with latitude to the Universities to chart their own plan/course
but it cannot be said that Universities were not to follow the
Guidelines on the pretext that it uses the expression "advisory".
[Para 65][965-E-H; 966-A-C]
2.2 The Revised Guidelines dated 06.07.2020 were issued
looking to the situation that COVID-19 cases are still rising and
likely to increase further. The Guidelines dated 06.07.2020 in
fact grant further time requiring the completion of examination
by 30.09.2020. Looking into the substance of the Guidelines dated
29.04.2020 and Revised Guidelines dated 06.07.2020, it is clear
that Guidelines dated 06.07.2020 are in continuation to the earlier
Guidelines and not contrary to the earlier Guidelines. The
Guidelines were issued with the object that a uniform academic
calendar be followed by all the Universities and final terminal
semester/final year examinations be held. With regard to
intermediate semester/year examination, the earlier UGC
Guidelines dated 29.04.2020 have been continued even in the
Revised Guidelines dated 06.07.2020. Therefore, the Guidelines
dated 06.07.2020 cannot be said to be contrary to the earlier
Guidelines dated 29.04.2020. [Para 65][966-C-F]
2.3 Guidelines have been issued by the UGC in exercise of
power under Section 12 of UGC Act. Section 12 provides that it
shall be the general duty of the Commission to take all such steps
as it may think fit for the promotion and co-ordination of University
education and for the determination and maintenance of standards
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
921
of teaching, examination and research in Universities. The words
"all such steps" are of wide import. The steps referred to in
Section 12 may include issuance of guidelines, directions, circulars
etc. The Guidelines dated 06.07.2020 has to be treated to have
been issued in exercise of statutory powers vested in the
Commission under Section 12. Guidelines issued in exercise of
statutory powers, thus, cannot be said to be non-statutory.
[Para 66][966-G-H; 967-A]
2.4 The University Grants Commission, in exercise of
power under Section 26 sub-section (1) of the UGC Act have
made the Regulations namely, "the UGC (Minimum Standards of
Instruction for the Grant of the Master's Degree through Formal
Education) Regulations, 2003". Regulation 6 thereof deals with
"examination and evaluation". The statutory Regulation, 2003
thus, categorically requires Universities to adopt the Guidelines
issued by the UGC, hence, it is the statutory duty of the
Universities to adopt the guidelines issued by the UGC. It is the
statutory obligation of the Universities to adopt the Guidelines
and the Guidelines cannot be ignored by terming it as nonstatutory or advisory. [Paras 66 and 67][967-B-D]
Professor Yashpal and Anr. v. State of Chhattisgarh and
Ors. (2005) 5 SCC 420 - relied on.
3.1 The revised guidelines dated 06.07.2020 have been
challenged claiming that it violates Article 14 of the Constitution,
as they discriminate between the students of Final year and First/
Second year. The Final year/terminal semesters examinations are
important because the learning process is a dynamic interaction
where the only way to figure out what students know is to seek
evidence of their knowledge and to evaluate it. Performance in
examination especially Final year/terminal semester examination
are reflection of competence of the students. Terminal semester/
Final year examination also provides an opportunity to the
students to improve upon their overall score/marks which are
very crucial for academic excellence and opportunities of
employment. Final year/terminal semester examination of underGraduate or post-Graduate is an opportunity for student to show
his optimum calibre which pave his future career both in academics
PRANEETH K. AND ORS. v. UNIVERSITY GRANTS
COMMISSION (UGC) AND ORS.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
922
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2020] 8 S.C.R.
and employment. The differentiation made by revised guidelines
to hold Final year/ Terminal semester examination has a rational
basis and there is an intelligible differentia between the student
of Final year/Terminal semester and other students. There is no
unreasonableness or arbitrariness in the revised guidelines of
University Grants Commission dated 06.07.2020 which require
all Universities/ Collages to conduct at least the final year/terminal
semester examination.[Paras 68, 70 and 71][967-F; 968-A-D]
3.2 It is also not correct that the guidelines failed the test
of Article 14 because they apply throughout India and being one
fixed date i.e. 30.09.2020 irrespective of the conditions prevailing
in the individual States/Universities. Even the earlier guidelines
dated 29.04.2020 provided for an academic calendar which
mentioned 01.07.2020 to 15.07.2020 for conduct of Terminal
semester/Final year examination and 16.07.2020 to 31.07.2020
for Intermediate semester/year examination. When the academic
calendar is set, fixed dates are always given for uniformity. The
UGC had rightly fixed a date for completion of the Terminal
semester/Final year examination throughout the country to
maintain uniformity in the academic calendar. The students who
look forward for admission in higher classes or take employment
require final degree for their career prospect and to maintain
uniformity in dates by which final examinations are over is with
the object of students welfare and for their career. [Paras 72 and
73][968-F-H; 969-A-B]
3.3. The features in the revised guidelines clearly indicate
that expert body took measures in the interest of the students
and their academic career. The revised guidelines has granted
further time for completion of examination till end of September,
2020, which was a step to facilitate Universities and Colleges to
complete their examination which was a reasonable step in wake
of the Pandemic. The guidelines made the conduct of examination
flexible by providing three modes of examination:(a) Offline (Pen
and Paper)(b) Online (c) Blended (Online + Offline). The revised
guidelines also made a provision of examination through special
chance in case a student of Terminal semester/Final year is unable
to appear in the examination due to any reason. The provision
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
923
for giving special chance to appear in examination is also in the
interest of the students to protect those students who due to any
reason are unable to appear in the examination. The above
measures taken in the revised guidelines are reasonable and the
criticism of the guidelines that they are unreasonable and
manifestly arbitrary are without any substance. Thus the revised
guidelines are not violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of
India. [Para 75][969-C-H]
4.1 There can be no doubt that it is the duty of the State to
take care of the health of its citizens. The various measures taken
by the specified authorities under the Disaster Management Act,
2005, are only with the object to contain the Pandemic and protect
the health of citizens of the country. The revised guidelines were
issued taking into consideration the fact that the number of covid
cases are still rising and likely to increase further which fact has
been categorically mentioned in the beginning of the revised
guidelines itself. Further, clause 6 of the revised guidelines
specifically provides that every University/Institution has to
ensure that it is prepared in all respect to carry out the academic
activity following necessary protocols, guidelines, directions,
advisories issued by the Central/ State Government from time to
time in view of Covid-19. The University Grants Commission is
conscious of increasing number of covid cases throughout the
country and the revised guidelines have extended the period for
completion of examination from 31.07.2020 to 30.09.2020 which
was only due to the reason that due to Pandemic, Universities/
Colleges may not have been able to hold the examination. [Paras
77, 78 and 79][970-C-F, H; 971-A]
4.2 After issuance of revised guidelines dated 06.07.2020
OM dated 06.07.2020, Ministry of Human Resource
Development (MHRD), has issued detailed guidelines for conduct
of examination which guidelines were duly vetted by Ministry of
Health and Family Welfare(MoHFW). The guidelines for conduct
of examination were circulated by University Grants Commission
vide its letter dated 08.07.2020. Standard Operating Procedure
for conduct of examination makes it abundantly clear that UGC,
MHRD, and Ministry of Health and Family Welfare are fully
concerned with the health of all stakeholders i.e. the students as
PRANEETH K. AND ORS. v. UNIVERSITY GRANTS
COMMISSION (UGC) AND ORS.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
924
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2020] 8 S.C.R.
well as exam functionaries. Therefore, it cannot be said that the
revised guidelines are violative of Article 21 of the Constitution.
[Paras 80, 81 and 82][971-C; 974-B-C]
5.1 Section 12 is part of Chapter III of UGC Act, 1956,
which deals with "Powers and functions of the Commission". The
use of the word 'Universities or other bodies concerned' in the
opening part of the Section has been with a purpose of referring
the Universities or other bodies concerned for whom the function
has to be performed by. The enumerations given from clause (a)
to (j) indicate that apart from Universities, the function also include
advice to the Central Government or any State Government on
allocation of any grant to the Universities or advise Central
Government or any State Government or any Universities on any
question which may be referred to the Commission by the Central
Government or the State Government. Thus, the expression
'other bodies' used in the opening part of the Section is in
reference to other bodies apart from Universities enumerated in
Section 12. 'Other bodies' as used in Section 12 would not include
State Disaster Management Authority or health experts. Section
12 never contemplated any such "bodies". Furthermore, the State
Disaster Management Authority came into existence only after
enactment of Disaster Management Act, 2005, no such concept
was there when the UGC Act, 1956 was enacted. The use of the
word 'concerned' after 'Universities or other bodies' has specific
purpose and meaning. The consultation with the Universities or
other bodies concerned was in reference to a particular function
which was enumerated in clause (a) to (j) and it has specific
reference and "Universities" or "other bodies" were referred
to in the above context. Section 12 cannot be interpreted in a
manner that for taking any measure with regard to coordination
of university education and for determination and maintenance
of standards of teaching examination in the Universities, the UGC
should consult each and every University of each and every State
and only then, such measures can be taken. Reading the provision
in above manner shall make the functioning of UGC unworkable.
There are more than nine hundred Universities in the country
and to require UGC to consult more than nine hundred
Universities for taking any measure will make the functioning
impossible and impractical. [Paras 84, 86 and 87][974-H; 977-CH; 978-A-B]
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
925
5.2 Section 12 cannot be interpreted in a manner that for
taking any steps by the UGC, there is a mandatory requirement
of consultation of all the States/Universities failing which no
measures can be taken by the University Grants Commission.
Clause (j) of Section 12 is couched in a very vide manner which
empower the Commission to perform such other functions as
may be prescribed or as may be deemed necessary by the
Commission for advancing the cause of higher education in India
or as may be incidental or conducive to the discharge of the above
function. Any function which may be deemed necessary by the
Commission can be performed. For performance of its function
by the Commission, the Commission of its own is fully competent
to take decisions, issue any directions, guidelines, etc. The
Commission may take assistance of any Committee of experts in
discharge of its functions for which there is no prohibition in the
statutory scheme. [Para 88][978-B-E]
5.3 The statutory scheme as delineated by Section 12
makes it clear that for the purposes of performing its functions
under the Act as enumerated in clause (a) to (j), it is not mandatory
duty of the Commission to consult with the Universities or other
bodies concerned in all cases e.g. while allocating and disbursing
out of the fund of the Commission, grants to the Universities as
enumerated in sub-clause (b) and (c). It is not necessary to consult
the university to whom the grant is to be allocated and disbursed.
The expression "in consultation with the Universities or other
bodies concerned" has to be read to mean where consultation
with Universities or other bodies concerned is necessary without
which the Commission is unable to perform its functions.
[Para 90][979-D-F]
5.4 The impugned revised Guidelines have been issued
after a report of an expert committee consisting of academicians
and experts. The UGC is empowered to perform such other
functions as may be deemed necessary by the Commission. If
the Commission felt it necessary to issue Guidelines after
obtaining a report from the expert committee, no exception can
be taken to the procedure adopted by the Commission. The
Guidelines dated 29.04.2020 as well as revised guidelines dated
06.07.2020 are general in nature and not confined to any particular
PRANEETH K. AND ORS. v. UNIVERSITY GRANTS
COMMISSION (UGC) AND ORS.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
926
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2020] 8 S.C.R.
university or any particular state. Hence, it cannot be said that
UGC is obliged to consult all Universities or States before
issuance of the guidelines. Therefore, guidelines dated 06.07.2020
cannot be said to be violative of Section 12 of UGC Act, 1956.
[Paras 92-94][980-B-E]
6.1 The Disaster Management Act, 2005 empowers the
State Disaster Management Authority as well as the State
Government to take decision for prevention and mitigation of a
disaster and the action taken by the authorities under the Disaster
Management Act have been given overriding effect to achieve
the purpose and object of the Act. In case of a disaster the priority
of all authorities under the Disaster Management Act is to
immediately combat the disaster and contain it to save human
life. Saving of life of human being is given paramount importance
and the Act, 2005 gives primacy, priority to the actions and
measures taken under the Act over inconsistency in any other
law for the time being in force. [Para 99][984-F-H]
State (NCT of Delhi) v. Sanjay (2014) 9 SCC 772 :
[2014] 9 SCR 1063 - referred to.
6.2 A perusal of the OM dated 06.07.2020 indicates that
the Ministry of Home Affairs has agreed to the request of the
Ministry of Human Resource Development and granted
exemption for the opening of educational institutions for the
purpose of holding examinations/ evaluation work for Final Term
Examinations of the Universities/Institutions. The said OM as
well as letter of the Ministry of Home Affairs cannot be read to
mean that it fettered the jurisdiction of the State Authority to
take a decision considering the situation in a State with regard to
conduct of examinations. The cumulative effect of OM dated
06.07.2020 and letter dated 06.07.2020 shall be that Government
of India granted exemption for holding the examinations which
shall be treated as exception to the guidelines dated 29.06.2020
issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs where Schools, Colleges,
educational and coaching institutions were to remain closed till
31.07.2020. The said OM and letter dated 06.07.2020 permitting
holding the examinations shall not fetter the power of the State
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
927
Disaster Management Authority to take appropriate measures
to contain the Disaster in the State. [Para 103][987-H; 988-A-C]
6.3 With regard to conduct of examinations, the State
authorities are competent to assess the situation in a particular
State regarding possibility of holding of examinations. No State
shall permit health of its subject to be compromised that is why
overriding power has been given to the State Disaster
Management Authority and the State Government with regard to
any inconsistency with any other law for the time being in force.
There are no orders or directions in the guidelines of the National
Disaster Management Authority or National Executive
Committee fettering the powers of the State Disaster
Management Authority and a State Government to take a decision
as to whether examinations by physical mode be permitted in
particular State looking to the situation in the State. Coming to
the guidelines dated 06.07.2020 of the UGC insofar as it directs
completion of final examinations by 30.09.2020 which direction
is overridden by the decision of the State Disaster Management
Authority and State Government where it resolved not to hold
the examinations. Thus, the direction of the University Grants
Commission in its revised guidelines dated 06.07.2020 insofar it
directs the Universities and colleges to complete the final year/
terminal examinations by 30.09.2020 shall be overridden by any
contrary decision taken by a State Disaster Management Authority
or the State Government exercising power under the Disaster
Management Act, 2005. [Para 104][988-G-H; 989-A-C]
7.1 University Grants Commission Act has been enacted
in reference to Entry 66 of List I. The States although have
legislative competence to legislate on education including
Universities but the State Legislation is subject to Entry 66 List
I. The revised guidelines issued by UGC are statutory and
referable to University Grants Commission Act, 1956 and shall
have precedence as compared to any inconsistent decision taken
by the State. The purpose and object of the Disaster Management
Act, 2005 is management of disasters and for matters connected
therewith. The Disaster Management is a continuous and
integrated process of planning,organising, coordinating and
implementing measures. [Para 107][991-D-F]
PRANEETH K. AND ORS. v. UNIVERSITY GRANTS
COMMISSION (UGC) AND ORS.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
928
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2020] 8 S.C.R.
7.2 The exercise of powers by the State Disaster
Management Authority or by the State Government which shall
have overriding effect under Section 72 are those exercise of
jurisdiction which are within the four corners of the Disaster
Management Act, 2005. When the State Disaster Management
Authority and State Government take a decision that for mitigation
or prevention of disaster it is not possible to hold physical
examination in the State, the said decision was within the four
corners of Disaster Management Act, 2005. However, the
decision of the Disaster Management Authority or the State
Government that students should be promoted without appearing
in the final year/terminal semester examination, is not within the
domain of the Disaster Management Act, 2005. The decision to
promote students and grant Degree by a State if contrary to any
Central enactment or guidelines issued thereunder the Central
enactment and the guidelines thereunder shall have precedence
by virtue of the same being referable to Entry 66 List I. Thus,
the State Disaster Management Authority and the State
Government has no jurisdiction to take a decision that the
students of final year/terminal examination should be promoted
on the basis of earlier years assessment and internal assessment
whereas the UGC guidelines dated 06.07.2020 directed
specifically to conduct final year/terminal semester examination.
The UGC guidelines dated 06.07.2020 in the above respect shall
override the decision of the State Government and the State
Disaster Management Authority regarding promoting the
students, does not fall within the jurisdiction of the Disaster
Management Act, 2005 and shall have no protection of Section
72 of the Disaster Management Act, 2005. The decision of the
State or the State Disaster Management Authority being contrary
to revised guidelines of the University Grants Commission cannot
be upheld and has to give way to the guidelines of UGC which is
the Authority to issue guidelines for determination and
maintenance of standards of education and teaching of the
Universities. [Para 109][992-D-H; 993-A-B]
8. The prayer to quash the revised guidelines dated
06.07.2020 issued by the University Grants Commission and OM
dated 06.07.2020 issued by the Ministry of Human Resource
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
929
Development and letter dated 06.07.2020 issued by the Ministry
of Home Affairs is refused. [Para 111(1)][995-C-D]
9. The decision taken by the State Disaster Management
Authority/State not to hold final year/terminal semester
examination by 30.09.2020 in exercise of power under Disaster
Management Act, 2005 shall prevail over deadline fixed by the
University Grants Commission i.e. 30.09.2020 in respect to the
concerned State. [Para 111(2)][995-D-E]
10. The decision of the State/State Disaster Management
Authority to promote the students in the final year/terminal
semester on the basis of previous performance and internal
assessment being beyond the jurisdiction of Disaster
Management Act, 2005 has to give way to the guidelines of UGC
dated 06.07.2020 directing to hold examination of final year/
terminal semester. The State and University cannot promote the
students in the final year/terminal semester without holding final
year/terminal examination. [Para 111(3)][995-F]
11. If any State/Union Territory in exercise of jurisdiction
under Disaster Management Act, 2005 has taken a decision that
it is not possible to conduct the final year/terminal semester
examination by 30.09.2020, liberty is granted to such State/Union
Territory to make an application to the University Grants
Commission for extending deadline of 30.09.2020 for that State/
Union Territory which shall be considered by UGC and
rescheduled date be communicated to such State/Union Territory
at the earliest. [Para 111(4)][995-G-H; 996-A]
Case Law Reference
[1963] Suppl. SCR 112
followed
Para 49
(1999) 7 SCC 120
followed
Para 50
[1997] 2 SCR 186
followed
Para 50
[2005] 2 SCR 23
relied on
Para 52
[2012] 13 SCR 810
relied on
Para 53
(2013) 10 SCC 519
relied on
Para 54
PRANEETH K. AND ORS. v. UNIVERSITY GRANTS
COMMISSION (UGC) AND ORS.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
930
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2020] 8 S.C.R.
[2016] 3 SCR 579
held inapplicable
Para 58
[2014] 9 SCR 1063
referred to
Para 99
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION: Writ Petition (Civil) No.
724 of 2020.
Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India
With
Writ Petition (Civil) No. 739,746, 745, 741, 794, 814, 862, 861 of
2020 and SLP(C) No. 10042 of 2020.
Tushar Mehta, SG, Ashok Parija, Adv. Gen., Dr. Abhishek Manu
Singhvi, Dhruv Mehta, Ms. Meenakshi Arora, Shyam Divan, Jaideep
Gupta, P.S. Narasimha, Vinay Navare, K.V. Vishwanathan, Arvind Datar,
Kishore Dutta, Mihir Desai, Sanjay Hegde, Sr. Advs., Raj Kamal, Sanjay
Kr. Dubey, Aavishkar Singhvi, Malak Bhatt, Aseem Atwal, Kartavya
Batra, Sanpreet Singh Ajmani, Alakh Alok Srivastava, Ms. Anubha
Shrivastava Sahai, Ms. Neela Gokhale, Ms. Anannya Ghosh,
Ms. Samiksha Godiyal, Nikhil Ranjan, Ms. Pratyushi Mehta, Pranaya
Goyal, Raghunath Chakaraborty, Kunal Chatterji, Ms. Maitrayee
Banerjee, Pravar Veer Misra, Kishor Lambat (for M/s. Lambat And
Associates), Shivankar Sharma, Talha Abdul Rahman, Kushagra Pandey,
Mohd. Shaz Khan, Udit Atul Konkanthankar, Pulkit Tare, Dr. Uday
Prakash Warunjikar, Abhay Anil Anturkar, C. George Thomas, Surendra
Kumar Gangele, Ms. Ritu Gangele, Ms. Swagoti Batchas, SPM Tripathi,
V.K. Shukla, Satish Kumar, Apoorv Kurup, G.S. Makker, Ms. Nidhi Mittal,
Siddharth Nigotia, Ms. Upama Bhattacharjee, Dr. R. R. Deshpande (for
M/s. Dr. R.R. Deshpande And Associates), Chirag M. Shroff,
Ms. Sanjana Nangia, Ms. Abhilasha Bharti, Rahul Chitnis, Sachin Patil,
Geo Joseph, Shibashish Misra, Vikas Mehta, Vikram Mehta, Sanjay Basu,
Apoorv Khator, Ms. Mansaa Shukla, Namit Saxena, Gaurav Agrawal,
Amir Singh Pasrich, Ms. Meera Mathur, Akash Sinha Shubham Saket,
Harpreet Singh Hora, Chirag, G. Priyadharshni (for Rahul Shyam
Bhandari), Yashodeep Deshmukh, Akshay Kapadia, Priank Adhyaru,
Dr. Balram Jain, R.P. Goyal, Ms. Rukhsana Choudhury, Jamshed Mistry,
Ms. Mohini Priya, Siddharth Dharmadhikari, Sahil Lal, Abhikalp Pratap
Singh, Bharat T. Manubarwala, Pranjal Kishore, Sarvagnya Trivedi
Manubarwala, Varun Varma, Ms. Nistha Gupta, Advs. for the appearing
parties.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
931
Petitioner-in-person
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
ASHOK BHUSHAN, J.
1. This batch of cases consisting of writ petitions (except one
Special Leave Petition, i.e., SLP (C) D. No.15056 of 2020) filed under
Article 32 of the Constitution of India can be divided into two broad
groups. First group of writ petitions consists of petitions filed by students,
youth organisations and the teachers associations challenging the
guidelines issued by University Grants Commission (hereinafter referred
to as "UGC") dated 06.07.2020, O.M. dated 06.07.2020 issued by
Ministry of Human Resource Development and letter dated 06.07.2020
issued by Ministry of Home Affairs whereby all the Universities and
Colleges across the country had been directed to conduct terminal
semester/ final year examinations by 30.09.2020. A further relief has
been sought directing the respondents to declare the results of the students
of the final year/terminal semester examinations of all universities/
institutions of the country on the basis of their past performance/internal
assessment and to award marksheets and degrees. The second group
of writ petitions are the writ petitions filed by the students challenging
the decision of the State Disaster Management Authority as well as of
the States (State of Maharashtra and State of West Bengal) for not
holding final term examination. Further prayers have been made that
State of Maharashtra as well as State of West Bengal be directed to
comply with the UGC revised guidelines dated 06.07.2020 and O.M.
dated 06.07.2020 of Ministry of Human Resource Development. The
special leave petition has been filed against a common order dated
14.07.2020 passed by the High Court of Delhi in Writ Petition No. 3199
of 2020 and other connected matters by which the High Court noted the
schedule of examination in the Open Book Examination (OBE) mode by
University of Delhi.
2. In Writ Petition (C) No. 724 of 2020, Praneeth K and
Others Vs. University Grants Commission and Others, a common
counter affidavit, additional affidavit and affidavit in reply to the UGC
has been filed. The State of Maharashtra has also filed affidavits in Writ
Petition (C) No. 724 of 2020. All the parties in Writ Petition (C) No. 724
of 2020 are represented. Other writ petitions and special leave petition
are tagged with Writ Petition (C) No. 724 of 2020. The decision in Writ
PRANEETH K. AND ORS. v. UNIVERSITY GRANTS
COMMISSION (UGC) AND ORS.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
932
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2020] 8 S.C.R.
Petition (C) No. 724 of 2020 shall be sufficient to answer the issues
raised in this batch of cases. The pleadings in Writ Petition (C) No. 724
of 2020 need to be noted in some detail with brief reference of prayers
in other writ petitions and special leave petition.
Writ Petition (C) No. 724 of 2020 - Praneeth K and Ors.
Vs. University Grants Commission and Ors.
3. This writ petition has been filed by 31 students pursuing
undergraduate or postgraduate terminal semester/final year courses in
different Universities located in different States across the country. The
petitioners are studying in different Universities located in States of
Kerala, Maharashtra, Assam, Gujarat, Himachal Pradesh, Uttarakhand,
NCT Delhi, Orissa, Madhya Pradesh, West Bengal, Haryana, Uttar
Pradesh, Bihar and Meghalaya. Petitioners' case is that due to pandemic
COVID-19, Government of India announced the nationwide lockdown
w.e.f. 24.03.2020 in order to contain the spread of COVID-19. The
Ministry of Health & Family Welfare, Government of India issued various
directions, guidelines and SOPs. Various educational institutes and
Universities extended their dates of examination for various courses
postponing the same indefinitely.
4. UGC constituted an Expert Committee to deliberate and make
recommendations regarding issues of examination and academic
calendar. The Expert Committee submitted its report on basis of which
UGC issued guidelines on 29.04.2020, in which guidelines it was proposed
to take the final year university examination by 31.07.2020. Number of
COVID cases being still rising, the above Expert Committee was
requested by UGC to revisit the guidelines. The Expert Committee
submitted its report, which was approved by UGC on 06.07.2020 and
UGC revised the guidelines and issued academic calendar for final year
examinations. In view of COVID-19 pandemic, the revised guidelines
provided that Universities are required to complete the examinations by
end of September, 2020 in offline (pen and paper)/online/blended (offline
+ online) following the prescribed protocol/guidelines relating to COVID19. On 06.07.2020, the Ministry of Human Resource Development
formulated SOP for conduct of the examination duly vetted by Ministry
of Health and Family Welfare. On 06.07.2020, the Ministry of Home
Affairs by a letter permitted the Ministry of Human Resource
Development to conduct the examination by Universities and institutions.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
933
5. The petitioners' case is that the decision of the UGC, Ministry
of Human Resource Development and Ministry of Home Affairs to
conduct the final term/final examinations of Universities and institutions
throughout the country amid COVID-19 pandemic is extremely arbitrary,
whimsical and detrimental to the health and safety of the students as
well as violative of fundamental rights of lakhs of students enshrined
under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India including those of
the writ petitioners.
6. In pursuance of the guidelines dated 06.07.2020, various
institutions and colleges have issued notifications notifying the final year
examination. Many universities and educational institutions of India and
abroad have issued their admission notification for the year 2020-2021
wherein the last date of online registration was 31.07.2020 and unless a
candidate possess the degree before that he cannot apply for admission.
Representation dated 09.07.2020 has been submitted to the Minister of
Human Resource Development to find an alternate way to save the
careers of the students. The petitioners have further claimed that various
other examination Boards like CBSE, ICSE, ISC have cancelled their
Xth/XIIth Board examination due to COVID-19 pandemic and has
declared the result on the basis of past performance/internal assessment.
On one hand, the UGC has exempted the students of intermediate years/
semester from appearing in the examinations due to COVID-19 outbreak
and on the other hand has forced the final year students to appear in the
examinations, which is discriminatory and arbitrary. The petitioners in
the writ petition have made following specific prayers:-
a) Issue urgent Writ In the nature of mandamus or any Other
appropriate Writ, Order or Direction to quash and set aside
the Letter bearing D.O. No.F.1-1/2020 (Secy) dated
06.07.2020 issued by the Respondent No.1 UGC (Annexure
P-3) AND the Office Memorandum bearing F.No. 16-16/2020U1A dated 06.07.2020, issued by the respondent No. 3 MHRD
(Annexure P-4) AND Notification bearing NW/RK/PK/AD/
DD dated 06.07.2020, issued by the Press Information Bureau,
Government of India (Annexure P-5) whereby all the
Universities and Colleges across India have been directed to
conduct final Term/final year examinations by 30.09.2020; and/
or
PRANEETH K. AND ORS. v. UNIVERSITY GRANTS
COMMISSION (UGC) AND ORS. [ASHOK BHUSHAN, J.]
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
934
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2020] 8 S.C.R.
b) Accordingly, issue urgent Writ In the nature of mandamus or
any other appropriate Writ, Order or Direction to the
Respondent Nos.