Research › Browse › Judgment

Supreme Court of India · body

2005 DIGILAW 288 (SC)

NIMESH MEHTA v. State Of MaharashtraS

2005-02-14

P.P.NAOLEKAR, Y.K.SABHARWAL

body2005
ORDER 1. HAVING HEARD THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA (RESPONDENT 1), DIRECTORATE OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION (RESPONDENT 2), ALL-INDIA COUNCIL FOR TECHNICAL EDUCATION (AICTE) (RESPONDENT 3) AND ASSOCIATION OF MANAGEMENT OF UNAIDED PRIVATE ENGINEERING COLLEGES OF MAHARASHTRA AND ON PERUSAL OF THE RECORDS, INCLUDING THE AFFIDAVIT FILED ON 4-1-2005 ON BEHALF OF THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA, WE PERMIT THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA TO CONDUCT THE COMMON ENTRANCE TEST (CET) IN RESPECT OF DEGREE ENGINEERING COURSES FOR THREE SUBJECTS I.E. MATHEMATICS (100 MARKS), PHYSICS (50 MARKS) AND CHEMISTRY (50 MARKS), TOTALLING 200 MARKS. WE ALSO PERMIT THE STATE GOVERNMENT TO PROVIDE FOR ELIGIBILITY TO THE AFORESAID COURSES ON SECURING AT LEAST FIFTY PER CENT AGGREGATE MARKS FOR THE GENERAL CATEGORY AND FORTY-FIVE PER CENT AGGREGATE MARKS FOR THE RESERVED CATEGORY IN THE AFORESAID THREE SUBJECTS. 2. THE THIRD RESPONDENT AICTE, BY PUBLIC NOTICE DATED 16-2-2004, AMENDED THE EXISTING NORMS FOR ADMISSION TO VARIOUS COURSES, INCLUDING THE DEGREE ENGINEERING COURSE, WITH WHICH WE ARE CONCERNED. THE SAID PUBLIC NOTICE, INTER ALIA, PROVIDES, AS MINIMUM QUALIFICATION, THAT A CANDIDATE SHOULD HAVE PASSED 10+2 EXAMINATION WITH PHYSICS AND MATHEMATICS AS COMPULSORY SUBJECTS ALONG WITH ANY OF THE FOLLOWING SUBJECTS: (A) CHEMISTRY (B) BIOTECHNOLOGY (C) COMPUTER SCIENCE (D) BIOLOGY. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA HAS BROUGHT TO OUR NOTICE THAT BIOTECHNOLOGY IS NOT AT ALL TAUGHT IN SCHOOLS IN MAHARASHTRA AND INSOFAR AS COMPUTER SCIENCE IS CONCERNED, IT IS NOT AVAILABLE TO THE STUDENTS TILL 10TH STANDARD. PRIMA FACIE, IT IS EVIDENT THAT BEFORE ANY AMENDMENT TO THE EXISTING NORMS IS INTRODUCED, A PRIOR NOTICE SHALL BE GIVEN TO THE STUDENTS AT THE TIME WHEN THEY HAVE TO OPT FOR THE SUBJECTS, PARTICULARLY, OPTIONAL SUBJECTS. FURTHER, AN EXERCISE IS ALSO REQUIRED TO BE CONDUCTED BY AICTE TO FIND OUT THE AVAILABILITY OF THE SUBJECTS AND THEIR EXTENT IN OTHER PARTS OF THE COUNTRY AS SOME ARE HIGH-SCORING SUBJECTS AND SOME ARE LESS-SCORING SUBJECTS. IN THIS VIEW, BEFORE FURTHER CONSIDERING AS TO THE PERIOD FROM WHICH THE AMENDMENT SHOULD AT ALL COME INTO EFFECT OR NOT, THE THIRD RESPONDENT SHALL FILE AN AFFIDAVIT WITHIN FOUR WEEKS PLACING ON RECORD THE DETAILED POSITION OF RELEVANT FACTS ALONG WITH THE RELEVANCY OF THE NEWLY INTRODUCED SUBJECTS. 3. IN THIS VIEW, BEFORE FURTHER CONSIDERING AS TO THE PERIOD FROM WHICH THE AMENDMENT SHOULD AT ALL COME INTO EFFECT OR NOT, THE THIRD RESPONDENT SHALL FILE AN AFFIDAVIT WITHIN FOUR WEEKS PLACING ON RECORD THE DETAILED POSITION OF RELEVANT FACTS ALONG WITH THE RELEVANCY OF THE NEWLY INTRODUCED SUBJECTS. 3. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA HAS ALSO BROUGHT TO OUR NOTICE THAT FOR THE PURPOSE OF BEING ELIGIBLE TO THE DEGREE ENGINEERING COURSE, IT IS MANDATORY FOR A CANDIDATE TO QUALIFY IN ENGLISH SUBJECT IN THE 10+2 EXAMINATION. COURT MASTERS