AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
D. Murugesan, J.—In exercise of the powers conferred u/s 3 of the University Grants Commission Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the
UGC Act""), the Central Government, on the recommendation of the Commission, declared the petitioner Shanmugha, Arts, Science, Technology
and Research Academy (SASTRA), Thanjavur as deemed to be University by notification dated 15.6.2001 with effect from 26.4.2001
(hereinafter referred to as the ""Deemed University""). Initially, Shanmugha College of Engineering was established in the year 1984 and was
administered by one Balaseva Educational and Charitable Trust. The college was affiliated to Bharathidasan University and was approved by the
All India Council for Technical Education. The college was offering courses like B.E., Civil, Mechanical, Electrical & Electronics &
Communication, B.E., Information Technology, Information Technology & Management, M.E. and M.C.A. The college was accredited by the
National Board of Accreditation. Thereafter, it was declared to be a Deemed University.
The Deemed University made an application on 23.4.2002 to the Bar Council of India (hereinafter referred to as the ""BCI"") for approval of
affiliation for the B.A., L.L.B.(5 years integrated) and L.L.B. (three years) courses u/s 7(1)(i) of the Advocates Act, 1961 . The BCI directed the
Deemed University to remit a sum of Rs. 50,000/- towards inspection fee and the said fee was also deposited by the Deemed University on
24.6.2002. A questionnaire sent by the BCI was also answered and duly returned. An inspection was carried on 26.1.2 005 and a report was
also submitted to the BCI. By the impugned order dated 1.7.2005, the request of the Deemed University for approval of the courses was rejected
and the said communication reads as under:-
BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA
21, Rouse Avenue
Institutional Area
New Delhi 110 002
1.7.2005
BCI:D:1044 2005 (LE:Mtg.)(2 TN-N) Regd.A.D.
The Registrar Shanmugha Arts, Science, Technology & Research Academy (SASTRA) Deemed University Tirumalaisamudram Thanjavur 613
402, Tamil Nadu
Sub: DISAPPROVAL OF AFFILIATION of LAW College under Shanmugha Arts, Science, Technology & Research Academy (SASTRA),
Thanjavur, TamilNadu
Sir,
The Report of Inspection of the above institution was placed before the Legal Education Committee at its meeting held on 24th June, 2005 and
Committee made the following recommendations:- According to Section 6(2) of Tamil Nadu Dr.Ambedkar Law University Act, 1996 there is a
clear requirement for all the institutions to have obtained permission/NOC from the State Govt. In view of the above, this Committee feels that
before granting any approval of affiliation, it is necessary for this institution to obtain NOC/permission from the State Govt. as the case may be.
Accordingly, the above-mentioned institution is not allowed to run the law course without complying with the rules, which have been quoted above,
and request is accordingly rejected. The above recommendations were considered by the Bar Council of India at its meeting held on 25th & 26th
June, 2005 and accepted the same.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
(S.Radhakrishnan)
Secretary
The Deemed University has questioned the above communication in this writ petition.
Mr.G. Rajagopalan, the learned Senior Counsel for the Deemed University has submitted that the Deemed University is entitled to offer law
courses without reference to the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Dr. Ambedkar Law University Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the "" Law
University Act"") and it is not required even to affiliate itself to the State Law University. The application made to the BCI was only with a view that
the students of the Deemed University shall get themselves enrolled with the BCI for the purpose of practise as Advocates in the Courts. In the
absence of any provision compelling the Deemed University to get No Objection Certificate from the State Government, the BCI cannot reject the
request for approval solely on the ground that the Deemed University has not obtained No Objection Certificate from the State Government.
Mr. K. Venkatakrishnan, the learned counsel appearing for the BCI, on the other hand, has submitted that at the time when the petitioner was
declared to be a Deemed University, it was only offering the Arts, Science and Technology courses. The declaration of Deemed University status
cannot be stretched even to start the law courses. Even when the application of the Deemed University was considered initially, the BCI vide
communication dated 23.4.2002 had informed that it should produce the No Objection Certificate from the State Government and an order of
affiliation from the State Law University. The Deemed University did not question the said communication, particularly with reference to the
condition for production of No Objection Certificate from the State Government. It is too late for the Deemed University now to question such
condition. He would also submit that in terms of Section 7(1)(h) & (i) of the Advocates Act, the BCI is entitled to insist for No Objection
Certificate from the State Government. He would also submit that Rule 18(k) of Part IV of Section A of the Five-Year Law Course after 10+2 or
11+1 of the Bar Council of India Rules (hereinafter referred to as the ""BCI Rules"") empowers the BCI to withdraw the approval in case of failure
on the part of the institution to submit to the BCI an annual return in the prescribed form at the end of annual academic session. He would also rely
upon Rule 18(2) for the institution to obtain permission/no objection from the State Government while applying for approval of affiliation. He would
further submit that in terms of Section 6(1) & (2) of the Law University Act, no law college or institution imparting legal education shall be affiliated
to any other University other than the Tamil Nadu Dr. Ambedkar Law University and such law college or institution shall be recognised by the
University for the purpose with the prior approval of the Government and the University concerned. For the purpose of determination of standards
in the legal education, the Deemed University shall produce No Objection Certificate from the State Government.
In view of the submissions, the following point arises for consideration. ""Whether the Bar Council of India can insist a Deemed University
intending to start law courses to obtain No Objection Certificate from the State Government as a pre-condition for consideration of request for
affiliation ?
The Parliament is vested with exclusive authority to enact law in regard to co-ordination and determination of standards in institutions for higher
education or research and scientific and technical institutions. Considering the growth of number of Universities, it was felt necessary for
constitution of the Commission not only for determination of standards in institutions for higher education or research and scientific and technical
institutions but also to allocate and disburse grants. The UGC Act was enacted to make provisions for coordination and determination of standards
in Universities. The expression ''co-ordination and determination of standards in institutions for higher education or research and scientific and
technical institutions came up for consideration before the Apex Court in the judgment in Bharati Vidyapeeth [Deemed University] and Others Vs.
State of Maharashtra and Another, "", wherein the Apex Court has held as follows:- (11) ""The expression ""coordination"" has been explained by this
Court in more than one decision. Firstly, in Gujarat University v. Krishna Ranganath Mudholkar and recently in State of T.N. v. Adhiyaman
Educational & Research Institute. In these two decisions it is stated that the expression ""coordination"" used in Entry 66 of List I of the Seventh
Schedule to the Constitution does not merely mean evaluation. It means harmonisation with a view to forge a uniform pattern for a concerted action
according to a certain design, scheme or plan of development. It, therefore, includes action not only for removal of disparities in standards but also
for preventing the occurrence of such disparities. It will include power to do all things, which are necessary to prevent what would make
coordination"" either impossible or difficult. This power is absolute and unconditional and in the absence of any valid compelling reasons, it must be
given its full effect according to its plain and express intention. (12) So far as standard of education is concerned, this Court in Preeti Srivastava
(Dr.) v. State of M.P. has explained that the process of admission falls within the scope of determining standards and held as follows: (SCC p.154
para 36)
It would not be correct to say that the norms for admission have no connection with the standard of education, or that the rules for admission
are covered only by Entry 25 of List III. Norms of admission can have a direct impact on the standards of education. Of course, there can be rules
for admission which are consistent with or do not affect adversely the standards of education prescribed by the Union in exercise of powers under
Entry 66 of List I. For example, a State may, for admission to the postgraduate medical courses, lay down qualifications in addition to those
prescribed under Entry 66 of List I. This would be consistent with promoting higher standards for admission to the higher educational courses. But
any lowering of the norms laid down can and does have an adverse effect on the standards of education in the institutes of higher education.
Section 2(f) of the UGC Act reads as under:-
University means a University established or incorporated by or under a Central Act, a Provincial Act or a State Act, and includes any such
institution as may, in consultation with the University concerned, be recognized by the Commission in accordance with the regulations made in this
behalf under this Act.
Section 3 of the UGC Act reads as under:-
The Central Government may, on the advice of the Commission, declare, by notification in the Official Gazette, that any institution for higher
education, other than a University, shall be deemed to be a University for the purposes of this Act, and on such a declaration being made, all the
provisions of this Act shall apply to such institution as if it were a University within the meaning of Clause (f) of Section 2.
The functions of the Commission established u/s 4 of the UGC Act are enumerated u/s 12 of Chapter III of the UGC Act. The relevant
provisions u/s 12 as to the functions of the Commission for the disposal of this writ petition are extracted below:-
(ccc) establish in accordance with the regulations made under this Act, institutions for providing common facilities, services and programmes for a
group of Universities or for the Universities in general and maintain such institutions or provide for their maintenance by allocating an disbursing out
of the Fund of the Commission such grants as the Commission may deem necessary. (d) recommend to any University the measures necessary for
the improvement of University education and advise the University upon the action to be taken for the purpose of implementing such
recommendation. (i) require a University to furnish it with such information as may be needed relating to the financial position of the University or
the studies in the various branches of learning undertaken in that University, together with all the rules and regulations relating to the standards of
teaching and examination in that University respecting each of such branches of learning. (j) 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 functions.
Section 25 of the UGC Act confers the power to the Commission to make rules to carry out the purposes of the Act. Section 25(2)(g) confers
the powers to the Commission for the inspection of Universities. Section 26 of the UGC Act confers the power to the Commission to make
regulations. Some of the areas where the regulations could be made applicable as per the said Section are extracted below:-
(d) specifying the institutions or class of institutions which may be recognised by the Commission under Clause (f) of Section 2;
(e) defining the qualifications that should ordinarily be required of any person to be appointed to the teaching staff of the University having regard to
the branch of education in which he is expected to give instructions;
(f) defining the minimum standards of instruction for the grant of any degree by any University;
(g) regulating the maintenance of standards and the coordination of work or facilities in Universities;
(h) regulating the establishment of institutions referred to in Clause (ccc) of Section 12 and other matters relating to such institutions.
In exercise of the powers conferred u/s 25(2)(g) of the UGC Act, the University Grants Commission (Inspection of Universities) Rules, 1960 were
made inter-alia providing the constitution and procedure for making the inspection. The said rules are applicable to Deemed University as well in
terms of Rule 2(b) of the Rules, which reads as follows:-
University means a University as defined in Section 2(f) of the University Grants Commission Act, 1956; and includes an institution of higher
learning deemed to be a University u/s 3 of the said Act.
For the purpose of inspection, the University shall also nominate not more than three representatives who may include the Vice-Chancellor or the
Registrar, the Dean or the Deans of Faculty/Faculties concerned and such other officers/teachers of the department/departments or institutions as
may be deputed by it. In carrying out the inspection, the Committee may have discussions with such officer/teachers and other members of the
department(s) or institution(s) to be inspected as may be considered necessary by the Committee. On completion of inspection, the Committee
shall report its findings to the Commission for its consideration. By the said rules the Commission is empowered to inspect the Universities including
the Deemed Universities as to the infrastructure facilities available to mai ntain the standards and coordination of work and facilities in the
Universities. In exercise of the powers conferred under Clause (f) of Sub-section (1) of Section 26 of the UGC Act, the Commission has made the
University Grants Commission (the minimum standards of instructions for the grant of the first degree through formal education in the faculties of
Arts, Humanities, Fine Arts, Music, Social Sciences, Commerce and Sciences) Regulations, 1985. The said regulations apply to the Deemed
University as well in terms of Clause (2) of Regulation 1 of the said Regulations. The regulations prescribe the minimum eligibility and educational
qualification of students to be admitted to the degree, number of working days, manner in which the examinations should be conducted,
appointment of teachers, etc. In exercise of the powers conferred by Clauses (e) and (g) of Sub-section (1) of Section 26 read with Section 14 of
the UGC Act, the Commission has framed the University Grants Commission (Minimum Qualifications required for the Appointment and Career
Advancement of Teachers in Universities and Institutions affiliated to it) Regulations, 2000. Regulation 1(ii) makes the regulations applicable to the
Deemed University as well. By that regulations the minimum qualifications for the post of Principals, Professors, Readers and Lecturers and the
constitution of committee for selection of those teachers are provided. In exercise of the powers conferred by subsection (3) of Section 22 of the
UGC Act, the Commission specifies the degrees for the purpose of application of the said section. Bachelor of Law or Laws (LL.B.) and Master
of Law or Laws (LL.M.) have also been specified in the said list.
Going through the scheme of the UGC Act, it is apparent that the Commission will have the power to recommend to any University the
measures necessary for reform and improvement of University education and to advice the University concerned about the action to be taken for
the purpose of implementing such recommendation. It will act as an expert body also to advice the Central Government on problems connected
with co-ordination of facilities and maintenance of standards in Universities. A combined reading of the above provisions shows that the
Commission is the authority to determine the standards in education in respect of Deemed University when such University offers the law degree
courses as well. The provisions relating to the coordination and determination of standards, inspection, admission of students, appointment of
teachers are all governed by the provisions of the UGC Act. These areas are occupied by the Central legislation enacted under Entry 66 of List I
of Schedule VII of the Constitution of India. In this regard, the law laid down by the Apex Court in Bharathi Vidyapeeth case (supra) can be
usefully referred to.
Under Section 3 of the Act, deemed university status will be given to those institutions that for historical reasons or for any other circumstances are
not universities and yet are doing work of a high standard in specialized academic field compared to a university and that granting of a university
status would enable them to further contribute to the course of higher education which would mutually enrich the institution and the university
system. Guidelines for considering proposals for declaring an institution as deemed to be university were also issued by UGC. Under the said
guidelines aspects relating to admission were specifically entrusted with UGC and admission could be made only through a common entrance test
on all-India basis. Such an exercise was intended to maintain a uniform standard and level of excellence. As we have pointed out, admission plays
a crucial role in maintaining the high quality of education. And for the proper maintenance of academic excellence, as intended by the UGC Act,
admission to deemed university have to be made under the control of UGC. This further goes to show that admission procedure to a deemed to be
university is fully occupied by Entry 66 of List I and the State cannot exercise any powers over admission procedure.
On the above backdrop, it should be now considered as to whether the BCI could insist No Objection Certificate from the State Government.
A Bill was introduced on the basis of the recommendations of the Law Commission on the subject of Reform of Judicial Administration in the year
1953, the main features of the Bill were indicated only for the purpose of (1) establishing an All India Bar Council and a common roll of advocates,
and advocate on the common roll having a right to practise in any part of the country and in any court, including the Supreme Court; (2) the
integration of the bar into a single class of legal practitioners known as advocates; (3) the prescription of a uniform qualification for the admission of
persons to be advocates; (4) the division of advocates into senior advoc ates and other advocates based on merit; (5) the creation of autonomous
Bar Councils, one for the whole of India and one for each State.
Much reliance was placed by the learned counsel for the BCI on Section 7(1)(h) & (i) of the Advocates Act relating to the functions of the
BCI. Clauses (h) & (i) of Sub-section (1) of Section 7 read as under:-
(h) to promote legal education and to lay down standards of such education in consultation with the Universities in India imparting such education
and the State Bar Councils. (i) to recognise Universities whose degree in law shall be a qualification for enrolment as an advocate and for that
purpose to visit and inspect Universities or cause the State Bar Councils to visit and inspect Universities in accordance with such directions as it
may give in this behalf.
In so far as Clause (h) of Sub-section (1) of Section 7, the BCI has got a duty to promote legal education and to lay down standards of such
education in consultation with the Universities in India imparting such education and the State Bar Councils. Clause (i) of subsection (1) of Section
7 empowers the BCI to recognise Universities whose degree in law shall be a qualification for enrolment as an advocate and for that purpose to
visit and inspect Universities or cause the State Bar Councils to visit and inspect Universities in accordance with such directions as it may give in
this behalf. The entire reading of the functions of the BCI shows that it may lay down standards of professional conduct and etiquette for
advocates; to lay down the procedure to be followed by its disciplinary committee and the disciplinary committee of each State Bar Council; to
safeguard the rights, privileges and interests of advocates; to promote and support law reform; to exercise general supervision and control over
State Bar Councils; to conduct seminars and organise talks on legal topics, etc. These functions relate only to lay down standards of professional
conduct and etiquette by advocate and exercise general supervision and control over State Bar Councils. Only in that context, the BCI has been
empowered to recognize Universities whose degree in law will be a qualification for enrolment as an advocate (See V. Sudeer Vs. Bar Council of
India and Another, .
Now the submission as to the application of Rule 18(k) of Part IV of Section A of the Five-Year Law Course after 10+2 or 11+1 of the BCI
Rules should be considered. The said Rule reads as under:-
University Law Department/constituent and affiliated law colleges to which the Bar Council of India has already accorded approval of affiliation
shall submit to the Bar Council of India an annual return in the form prescribed (as per Schedule IV) by the Bar Council of India at the end of
annual academic session failing which the approval of affiliation accorded shall be liable to be withdrawn or cancelled. (1) After refusal to grant
permission to start a law college or to extend approval of affiliation to any existing law college, no fresh application for the same purpose shall be
entertained until the expiry of the next academic session or one calendar year whichever is later from the date of such refusal by the Bar Council of
India. (2) Every law college applying for approval of affiliation shall obtain permission no objection for establishment of law college from
Government or Higher Education Department of the State, if the same is a requirement under the prevailing law or any order in the State.
The above rule also applies only to the University Law Department/constituent and affiliated law colleges. By that rule, the BCI is only empowered
to grant approval of affiliation for the purpose of enrolment of advocates and a reading of the above rules does not indicate that the No Objection
Certificate is a pre-condition for a Deemed University before it is accorded approval of affiliation by the BCI. Hence, the submission of the learned
counsel for the BCI as to the application of the provisions of Section 7(1)(h) & (i) of the Advocates Act and Rule 18(k) of the BCI Rules has to
be rejected.
Learned counsel for the BCI has referred to Section 6 of the Law University Act, which reads as under:-
6(1) No Law college or institution imparting legal education within the University area shall be affiliated to any other University other than the Tamil
Nadu Dr.Ambedkar Law University. (2) No Law college or institution imparting legal education affiliated to, or associated with, or maintained by,
any other University, whether within the State of Tamil Nadu or outside the State of Tamil nadu, shall be recognised by the University for any
purpose except with the prior approval of the Government and the University concerned.
Sub-section (1) of Section 6 requires that no law college or institution imparting legal education within the University area shall be affiliated to any
other University other than the Tamil Nadu Dr. Ambedkar Law University. The said section applies to a law college or institution and not the
University as such or the Deemed University for that matter. In terms of Sub-section (2) of Section 6, no law college or institution imparting legal
education affiliated to, or associated with, or maintained by, any other University, whether within the State of Tamil Nadu or outside the State of
Tamil nadu, shall be recognised by the University for any purpose except with the prior approval of the Government and the University concerned.
This section also applies only to a law college or institution imparting legal education affiliated to or associated with or maintained by any other
University other than Tamil Nadu Dr.Ambedkar Law University whether within the State of Tamil Nadu or outside the State of Tamil Nadu shall
be recognised by the University for any purpose except with the prior approval of the Government and the University concerned. This section also
does not apply to the University as such or the Deemed University and consequently mandates the approval of affiliation from the University and
consequently for the purpose of approval from the State Government. In this regard, it must be kept in mind that when once an institution is
declared to be a Deemed University, its activities must be regulated only under the provisions of the UGC Act. In view of the such provisions
under the UGC Act, the Legislature thought it fit not to include the Universities or the Deemed Universities to be affiliated to the Tamil Nadu
Dr.Ambedkar Law University and therefore, they have excluded the application of Section 6 relating to the affiliation to the Tamil Nadu
Dr.Ambedkar Law University by the Universities or Deemed Universities. The submission of the learned counsel for the BCI as to the application
of Section 6 to the Deemed University as well is only liable to be rejected. When the provisions of the Act are interpreted, the plain and literal
meaning alone should be preferred and if such interpretation is adopted, the submission of the learned Senior Counsel for the Deemed University in
regard to the nonapplication of the said section to the Deemed University must be accepted. It is not out of place to mention that even the Tamil
Nadu Dr.Ambedkar Law University Act does not either provide or insist an affiliation by the University or Deemed University and the BCI cannot
even insist for recognition on a Deemed University for the purpose of approval. Hence the submission of the learned counsel for the BCI in this
regard is rejected.
So far as the submission of the learned counsel for BCI that when the Deemed University status was conferred on SASTRA it was only
offering Arts, Science and Technology courses and that it did not apply to the Law courses, it is to be seen that when once the University is
declared as Deemed University, it shall apply to all courses existing or to be introduced, of course, with the approval of the University. Merely
because at the time when the University was declared to be a Deemed University it did not offer law courses does not take away its right to impart
legal education through its Deemed University status. Hence, the said contention also fails.
If the regulations relating to the maintenance of standards in education, admission of students and appointment of teachers are occupied by the
Central enactment, the provisions of the Law University Act are not applicable to a Deemed University in the matters relating to conduct of
classes, conduct of examination and conferment of degrees and in the absence of any provisions under the Advocates Act or the rules and
regulations framed thereunder for such insistence, I do not find any justification in the impugned order insisting the Deemed University to obtain No
Objection Certificate from the State Government.
For all the above discussions, the impugned order is set aside and the writ petition is allowed. The Bar Council of India is directed to consider
the application of the petitioner for approval of affiliation to the B.A.,L.L.B.(5 years integrated) and L.L.B. (three years) law courses without
reference to the No Objection Certificate from the State Government. However, it is made clear that the Bar Council of India is entitled to
consider the request for approval of affiliation on the basis of the inspection report. No costs.