Judgment Vikramajit Sen, C.J. 1. These Appeals assail the Interim Order dated 03.09.2012 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petitions Nos.30489/2012 connected with W.P. Nos. 28129-28228/2012. We shall decide the Appeals together with Writ Petition Nos.36565-37034/2012, which have been brought on our roster at the request of the learned counsel for the writ petitioners; their impleadment applications in the Appeals, stand withdrawn by them. 2. The prayers in the writ petitions Nos.28129-28228/2012 are for the issuance of Certiorari striking down the Visvesvaraya Technological University Autonomous College Statute 2006 [for brevity ‘VTUACS 2006’] framed under Section 48(A) of the VTU Act 1994 on the assertion that it is colourable and ultra vires and non est; a declaration that the ‘VTUACS 2006’ is discriminative among the same class of Bachelor of Engineering [for brevity ‘B.E’] course students of Visvesvaraya Technological University [for brevity ‘VTU’] and the law is in flagrant violation of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India; for a declaration that the facility of supplementary semester and supplementary examination conducted at the end of each academic year, as well as the make-up examination in Autonomous Colleges denies an equal opportunity to other students pursuing the B.E degree from the same University namely VTU in non-autonomous/Affiliated Colleges; a declaration that the supplementary examination, make-up examination, credit system and attendance regulations in the Autonomous Colleges is "arbitrary and illegal"; and for passing of "such other relief to compensate the loss of years by the petitioners and the monetary loss in the interest of justice and equity". Interim Orders have been prayed on the edifice of the main prayers delineated by us above. 3. As already mentioned, Writ Petition Nos.36565-37034/2012 have been brought before us at the request made by the learned counsel for the petitioners. Interim Orders have been prayed on the edifice of the main prayers delineated by us above. 3. As already mentioned, Writ Petition Nos.36565-37034/2012 have been brought before us at the request made by the learned counsel for the petitioners. The prayers in the said writ petitions are for issuance of Mandamus directing the VTU to 'prescribe uniform examination system both internal and external including the syllabus in both Autonomous Colleges and other Colleges since the degree are being conferred by the Parent University -VTU; for a declaration that the VTUACS 2006 to the extent of prescribing different standards in starting of new courses and restructuring the courses and examination standards as arbitrary, illegal and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India; to direct the VTU to recall the VTUACS 2006 or amend it to bring it in conformity with the VTU Regulations; to direct the Respondents to prescribe the courses based on uniform standard and pattern examination; to declare that denial of admission to the petitioners to 5th and 7th Semester of B.E. courses as arbitrary, discriminatory and violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India etc." 4. The challenge in this lis essentially is to the contents of the 'Regulations Governing Academic Programs' in the Visvesavaraya Technological University [VTU]. The salient contents, for the purposes of the present decision, are these -"OBA3.0 ATTENDANCE REQUIREMENT OBA3.1 A candidate shall undergo the prescribed course of study in a college affiliated to "Visvesvaraya Technological University and satisfy necessary attendance requirement. OBA3.2 Each semester is considered as a unit and a student shall put in a minimum of 85% of attendance in each of the subjects prescribed for a semester, which includes lecture, Practical and Studio. OBA3.3 The Vice Chancellor may condone the deficit in attendance of a candidate who has attended between 75% and 85% of the classes in any subject on his showing a reasonable clause for the deficit along with the recommendation of the Head of the concerned. Architecture Department/Principal of the concerned institution. A candidate obtaining less than 75% of attendance in any subject shall have to repeat the whole semester and such candidates shall not be permitted to take the admission to the next semester. Architecture Department/Principal of the concerned institution. A candidate obtaining less than 75% of attendance in any subject shall have to repeat the whole semester and such candidates shall not be permitted to take the admission to the next semester. OBA3.4 Head of the concerned Architecture Department/Principal of the concerned Institution shall report cases of shortage of attendance to the University immediately after the closure of the term and well before the commencement of examination, theory, viva voce or term work, whichever is earlier. OBA3.5 In all cases, the basis for the calculationof the attendance shall be the period prescribed by the University by its calendar of events and in case of late admission to the First Semester of the course on C.E.T allotment, from the date of admission. OBA3.6 The student shall be informed about the attendance position periodically by the college so that he/she shall be cautioned to make up the shortage. Provided that mere omission by the College to inform the student about the shortage of attendance shall not entitle him to appear for examination". OB 6 MAXIMUM DURATION FOR COURSE COMPLETION OB6.1 A candidate who has not obtained the eligibility for third semester after a period of three academic years from the date of first admission shall discontinue the course. However, the candidate is eligible for readmission for first year B.E/B.Tech. in respective Colleges of the University and he/she shall be allotted a University Seat Number (USN) without any change in the year admission in the USN but the serial number of the candidate shall start with six hundred (6XX) series in the same branch (amended and approved in 52nd E.C. Res. No.2.4). OB6.2 The candidate shall complete the course within a period of eight academic years from the date of first admission, failing which he/she has to discontinue the course. Provided that the candidates admitted under lateral entry scheme shall complete the course within a period of six academic years from the date of first admission, failing he/she has to discontinue the course. (Amended and approved in 74th E.C (12-8-2008) No.6.1) OB 7 PROMOTION AND ELIGIBILITY FOR THE EXAMINATION OB 7.1 There shall not be any restriction for promotion from an odd semester to the next even semester, provided the candidate has fulfilled the attendance requirement. (Amended and approved in 74th E.C (12-8-2008) No.6.1) OB 7 PROMOTION AND ELIGIBILITY FOR THE EXAMINATION OB 7.1 There shall not be any restriction for promotion from an odd semester to the next even semester, provided the candidate has fulfilled the attendance requirement. OB 7.2 A candidate shall be eligible for promotion from an even semester to the next odd semester (i.e. to the next academic year) if the candidate has not failed in more than four heads of passing of the immediately preceding two semesters and has passed in all the subjects of all the still lower semester examinations. A theory or practical shall be treated as a head of passing. Illustrations a. A candidate seeking eligibility to 3rd semester should not have failed in more than 4 heads of passing of first and second semesters taken together. b. A candidate seeking eligibility to 5th semester should have passed in all the subjects of 1st and 2nd semesters and should not have failed in more than 4 heads of passing of third and fourth semesters taken together. c. A candidate seeking eligibility to 7th semester should have passed in all the subjects up to 4th semester and should not have failed in more than 4heads of passing 5th and 6th semesters taken together." 5. The Petitioners before us are admitted in the sundry Affiliated Colleges of VTU in contradistinction to other students who are enrolled in Autonomous Colleges of the VTU. The latter have been established on the predication contained in the "Guidelines for Autonomous Colleges during Eleventh Plan Period [2007-12]" formulated by the University Grants Commission, New Delhi [for brevity ‘UGC’]. The introduction contained in the XI Plan Guidelines notes that the affiliating system of colleges was originally designed when their number in a University was small. With the increase of colleges, the system has become unwieldy affecting academic development of individual colleges, which although possessing potential for offering programmes of a higher standard can achieve them only if they are granted freedom to do so. With the increase of colleges, the system has become unwieldy affecting academic development of individual colleges, which although possessing potential for offering programmes of a higher standard can achieve them only if they are granted freedom to do so. On these premises, ‘The National Policy of Education [NPE] (1986-1992) has granted, inter alia, the following freedoms to Autonomous Colleges: i) Determine and prescribe its own courses of study and syllabi, and restructure and redesign the courses to suit local needs; and ii) Prescribe rules for admission in consonance with the reservation policy of the State government; and iii) Evolve methods of assessments of students' performance the conduct of examinations and notification of results. In accordance with the National Policy, the M.S. Ramaiah Institute of Technology Bangalore [Autonomous Institute, Affiliated to VTU] has prescribed the following Regulations which are broadly the same in all other Autonomous Colleges. For the purposes of the dispute before us, we shall reproduce the following Regulations: 3.2 Maximum Duration 3.2.1 The maximum period within which a student must complete a full-time academic program is: 8 years for B.E, 10 years for B.Arch, 4 years for M.Tech, 4 years for MBA and 6 years for MCA. If a student fails to complete the academic program within the maximum duration as specified above, he/she will be required to withdraw from the program. However, the student can seek readmission to the first year of the program as a fresh candidate. 3.2.2 For students admitted under lateral entry scheme in B.E degree program, the maximum period within which a student must complete a full-time academic program is 6 years. If a student fails to complete the academic program within the maximum duration as specified above, he/she will be required to withdraw from the program. 3.2.3The period is reckoned from the academic year in which the student is admitted first time in to the degree programme. 3.3 Semester Structure 3.3.1 Each academic year is divided into three semesters, two being main semesters and one being a supplementary semester. Main semesters are for regular class work. Supplementary Semester is primarily for failed students. The Institute may use this semester to arrange Add-on Courses for regular students and/or for deputing them for practical training. 3.3 Semester Structure 3.3.1 Each academic year is divided into three semesters, two being main semesters and one being a supplementary semester. Main semesters are for regular class work. Supplementary Semester is primarily for failed students. The Institute may use this semester to arrange Add-on Courses for regular students and/or for deputing them for practical training. 3.3.2 Each main semester shall be of 19 weeks duration and this period includes time for Registration of courses, Course work, Examination preparation, Conduct of examinations, Assessment and Declaration of final results. 3.3.3. Each main semester shall have a minimum of 90 working days. 3.3.4. The supplementary semester shall be a fast -track semester consisting of eight weeks and this period includes time for Registration of Courses, Course Work, Examination preparation, Conduct of Examinations, Assessment and Declaration of final results. 3.3.5 All subjects may not be offered in the supplementary semester. The student has to pay a special fee prescribed by the college to register for a course in the supplementary semester. The supplementary semester is provided to help the student in not losing an academic year. It is optional for a student to make use of supplementary semester. Supplementary semester is a special semester and the student can not demand it as a matter of right. 3.3.6 The Academic Calendar is declared at the start of the semester. 9. ATTENDANCE REQUIREMENT 9.1 Each semester is considered as a unit and the candidate has to put in a minimum attendance of 85% in each subject with a provision of condonation of 10% of the attendance by the Principal for reasons such as medical emergencies, participation in sports, cultural activities, seminars, workshops and paper presentation, etc., at the level of University, State, Nation, etc. 9.2 The basis for the calculation of the attendance shall be the period prescribed by the College by its calendar of events. For late admission, attendance is reckoned from the date of admission to the program. 9.3 If a student does not fulfill the attendance requirements in any subject, he/she is not permitted to attend the Semester End Examination in that subject and is deemed to have been awarded "NE" grade in that subject. 6. A perusal of the prayers in both the writ petitions delineates the arguments addressed on behalf of the writ petitioners. 9.3 If a student does not fulfill the attendance requirements in any subject, he/she is not permitted to attend the Semester End Examination in that subject and is deemed to have been awarded "NE" grade in that subject. 6. A perusal of the prayers in both the writ petitions delineates the arguments addressed on behalf of the writ petitioners. It is their contention that the system in the Autonomous Colleges provides opportunities that are favourable and advantageous to their students, when compared to the prevalent system in Affiliated Colleges which manifests inequality. The arguments on their behalf also contains a flavour of class discrimination which we perceive is only an argument of prejudice. The submission is that the students who may be comparatively less meritorious than the petitioners, but who can afford to pay substantially higher tuition fee are placed in an advantageous position academically. It is however not their case that the standards maintained by the Autonomous Colleges are inferior to those in the sundry Affiliated Colleges; may, it is accepted that the system in the Autonomous Colleges is more congenial towards quick as well as slow learners and that the results depict that the latter have better academic facilities. Facially, the Petitioners cannot substantiate discriminatory treatment solely on the premise that Autonomous Colleges produce better results because of better scholastic absorption and attainment of their students. Conversely, the Petitioners cannot claim discrimination if standards in the Autonomous Colleges are inferior to what is prevalent in Affiliated Colleges. We must immediately record that admission to the professional courses like MBBS, B.E, and Architecture are done strictly in consonance with the order of merit prepared after Common Entrance Test [CET] conducted by the Karnataka Examination Authority as well as the COMEDK. Private or Autonomous Colleges cannot reserve more than 50% quota for the students who are granted admission from the Management Quota. Therefore, outstanding and meritorious students can avowedly gain admission even to Autonomous Colleges without having to pay fee on the scales demanded from students of the Management Quota. The fact that the reputation of the Autonomous Colleges is higher than that of the Affiliated Colleges is borne out from the counseling carried out pursuant to the CET as well as the COMEDK. The fact that the reputation of the Autonomous Colleges is higher than that of the Affiliated Colleges is borne out from the counseling carried out pursuant to the CET as well as the COMEDK. The second argument of prejudice sought to be made by the learned counsel for the writ petitioners is that the students coming from a financially rich background can obtain B.E degree in milieu which is easier than that existing in Affiliated Colleges. We are however, not impressed by this argument for the simple reason that the students enrolled in both systems cannot expect automatic promotion to the next academic year viz., [3rd, 5th and 7th Semesters, as the case may be], if they carry a backlog of more than four (4) subjects in which they have failed. We hasten to clarify that at the commencement of the 3rd academic year (5th Semester) and the 4th academic year (7th Semester) all subjects in the academic year preceding the immediate last, must be cleared by the students both from the Autonomous Colleges as well as the Affiliated Colleges so as to enable them to become eligible for admission to the next semester. In other words, if admission is sought to the 5th (odd) Semester even if a students has the backlog of only four failed subjects if any of them pertaining to 1st or 2nd Semester, admission will be refused irrespective of status of Colleges. Per se, we find obvious wisdom in this stipulation inasmuch as the course of studies adhere to a transcending basis, which would make it difficult for a students to cope with the more advanced course in the succeeding semester, if he has failed to attain the minimum comprehension of a previous paper. 7. We must immediately clarify that the Court cannot claim knowledge and expertise in the filed of education, and this competence must be reserved for better academicians. It would be most inexpedient and inopportune for a Court to interfere in the field of academics and/or to direct the educationist to change the syllabus or the foundation for admission, or promotion, or investiture of a degree. It would be most inexpedient and inopportune for a Court to interfere in the field of academics and/or to direct the educationist to change the syllabus or the foundation for admission, or promotion, or investiture of a degree. On this aspect of the case, we can do no better than to reproduce the observations contained in All India Council for Technical Education Versus Surinder Kumar Dhawan AIR 2009 Supreme Court 2322, in order to caution the Court to abjure from interfering in education matters: 12. There is considerable force in the submission of the appellant. Having regard to clauses (i) and (k) of section 10 of the All India Council for Technical Education Act. 1987 ['Act' for short], it is the function of the AICTE to consider and grant approval for introduction of any new course or programme in consultation with the agencies concerned, and to lay down the norms and standards for any course including curricula, instructions, assessment and examinations. The decision whether a bridge course should be permitted as a programme for enabling diploma holders to secure engineering degree, and if permitted, what should be the norms and standards in regard to entry qualification, content of course instruction and manner of assessing the performance by examinations, are all decisions in academic matters of technical nature. AICTE consists of professional and technical experts in the field of education qualified and equipped to decide on those issues. In fact, a statutory duty is cast on them to decide these matters. The courts are neither equipped nor have the academic or technical background to substitute themselves in place of statutory professional technical bodies and take decisions in academic matters involving standards and quality of technical education. If the courts start entertaining petitions from individual institutions or students to permit courses of their choice, either for their convenience or to alleviate hardship or to provide better opportunities, or because they think that one course is equal to another, without realizing the repercussions on the field of technical education in general, it will lead to chaos in education and deterioration in standards of education. 13. The role of statutory expert bodies on education and role of courts are well defined by a simple rule. If it is a question of educational policy or an issue involving academic matter, the courts keep their hands off. 13. The role of statutory expert bodies on education and role of courts are well defined by a simple rule. If it is a question of educational policy or an issue involving academic matter, the courts keep their hands off. If any provision of law or principle of law has to be interpreted, applied or enforced, with reference to or connected with education, courts will step in. In Dr. J.P. Kulshreshtha Versus Chancellor, Allahabad University [ 1980 (3) SCC 418 ] this court observed: "Judges must not rush in where even educationists fear to tread... While there is no absolute bar, it is a rule of prudence that courts should hesitate to dislodge decisions of academic bodies." In Maharashtra State Board of Secondary and Higher Secondary Education Versus Paritosh Bhupeshkumar Sheth [ 1984 (4) SCC 27 ] this court reiterated: "…………..the Court should be extremely reluctant to substitute its own views as to what is wise, prudent and proper in relation to academic matters in preference to those formulated by professional men possessing technical expertise and rich experience of actual day-to-day working of educational institutions and the departments controlling them." 8. It is worthwhile to emphasize that whilst attendance criteria is the same in both the 215 Affiliated Colleges and 14 Autonomous Colleges, the pass percentage is 35% and 50% respectively, thereby making it clear that the standards in the Autonomous Colleges is higher and more stringent than that obtaining in the affiliated colleges. We would be loathe to restrain ourselves from interference if it were to be clear to us that it is easier, because of lower standards, to obtain a B.E degree in the Autonomous Colleges in which a large segment of students come from relatively affluent families also able to afford substantially higher fee. While on the subject we cannot but note that even private colleges and educational institutions cannot survive except on receipt of substantial if not overwhelming financial support from the State and through the aegis of the UGC. Added thereto is the reality that for each student who succeeds in obtaining admission to higher studies, at least five are turned away with abject disappointment. There can therefore be no justification for running short of attendance, as the students are guilty of wasting national resources. Added thereto is the reality that for each student who succeeds in obtaining admission to higher studies, at least five are turned away with abject disappointment. There can therefore be no justification for running short of attendance, as the students are guilty of wasting national resources. If the lack of attendance is non condonable and is because of ill-health, it will be nevertheless preferable for such students to repeat the year, if not for educational excellence, for the attainment of rudimentary and basic competence and knowledge. Further more, as the adage goes, exceptions should not make the rule Good cases should not lead to laying down bad law. 9. There is a considerable merit and substance in the arguments of the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the VTU that the writ petitioners do not have any right to challenge the vires or legality of the VTU Statute or the VTUACS 2006. The main grievance of the writ petitioners is that the VTU does not enable them to overcome either shortage of attendance or failure to obtain passing percentages, by holding a supplementary or make-up Semester examination, as is prevalent practice in Autonomous Colleges. Contrary to the picture which the Petitioners paint it is not possible for the students in the Autonomous Colleges to purchase a passport for lack of attendance or for passing of examination papers to clear the backlog subjects. As we have already noted, the students in this category in Autonomous Colleges have to go through the onerous participation in the supplementary Semester and only if successful, do they advance to the next academic year or odd Semester. Attendance is not an empty formality or a punctilio; it is ordained in order to ensure that the students can gain from the input and knowledge received in supplementary teachings and lectures. The so-called slow learners or weak students in Autonomous Colleges are therefore not in a position of advantage when compared to those in the sundry Affiliated Colleges except that they can avail the remedial classes. So far as the attendance is concerned, it has to be made up and as far as the extra academic attention is concerned, the students in sundry Affiliated Colleges can similarly avail of private tuitions. 10. We shall now consider whether the equality mandate enshrined in Article 14 of the Constitution of India has been breached, even a trifle. So far as the attendance is concerned, it has to be made up and as far as the extra academic attention is concerned, the students in sundry Affiliated Colleges can similarly avail of private tuitions. 10. We shall now consider whether the equality mandate enshrined in Article 14 of the Constitution of India has been breached, even a trifle. Almost immediately after we gave ourselves to our Constitution, interpretation of Article 14 was called for by the Supreme Court of India. In State of Bombay Versus Balsara AIR 1951 SC 318 it has been clarified that for any classification to be reasonable and constitutional, it must satisfy two tests -firstly, it must be founded on an intelligible differentia which distinguishes those within and without the grouping; secondly, the differentia must have rational nexus with the object which is sought to be achieved by the sundry segregation. This enunciation of the law is as old as our Republic. In Chiranjilal Versus Union of India AIR 1951 SC 41 as well as in Ramakrishen Dalmia Versus Tendolkar Air 1958 SC 538 , even one person or one group set apart from the rest was held not to be unreasonable or unconstitutional provided that severance was conducive to the attainment of the object behind the severance. In D.S.Nakara Versus Union of India AIR 1983 SC 130 , the Constitution Bench held that executive action would not be unconstitutional if the twin tests of (a) a discernible division and (b) intended to achieve a lawful objective, are palpably present. 11. In the case in hand there is a clear and intelligible differentia inasmuch as there are sundry Affiliated Colleges on the one hand and the Autonomous Colleges on the other. It is true that all undergraduate students form a composite class of their own and that if any invidious discrimination is meted out to persons in this same class, without any rational basis or relationship with a particular objective, it would violate Article 14 of the Constitution of India, as also recently adumbrated in Bondu Ramaswamy Versus Bangalore Development Authority (2010) 7 SCC 129 . The stated raison d'etre is that student strength as well as the Colleges attached to the Universities have grown so exponentially that for their viability to be preserved some fragmentation is necessary. The stated raison d'etre is that student strength as well as the Colleges attached to the Universities have grown so exponentially that for their viability to be preserved some fragmentation is necessary. The experts have thought that autonomy will be conducive to better educational standards and the Court is not equipped to question that view. Certainly no empirical/impartial evidence has been disclosed to us to hazard an opinion contrary thereto. Indeed, statistics signal to the contrary. Inequality may have been created and perpetuated, if it is easier for the students in Autonomous Colleges to obtain the B.E degree; but as we have already reflected above, this is not the case. The students are not able to buy a B.E degree as was the oblique slant of the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner. It cannot obviously be argued or even expected that all colleges and institutions must maintain the same standards. In every University there are some Colleges who have achieved academic ascendancy/excellence over others leading to aspiration of students for admission thereto. This is because such colleges have better facilities; a better teaching faculty, better infrastructure, and for this simple reason attract the cream of students. Article 14 does not ordain that academic standards must be lowered so that so-called equality can be obtained. Hence, we are of the considered view that there is no substance in the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners that the provisions of VTU Autonomous Colleges Statute, 2006 are violative of Articles 14 of the Constitution of India. Pabitra Kumar Versus State of West Bengal, AIR 1964 SC 593 , to which the learned counsel for the writ petitioners has referred, is of no advantage to their cause. We are also of the opinion that the decision of the Apex Court in Basheshar Nath Versus The Commissioner of Income Tax, AIR 1959 SC 149 need not be discussed because of the conclusion we have arrived at. 12. It is distressing to us, as it could be to the VTU, that there are as many as approximately 30000 students who have failed in various Semesters. On the first date of hearing no one was present from the administration of the VTU, and on the next date only an officer from the examination branch thought it necessary to attend the hearings before us. On the first date of hearing no one was present from the administration of the VTU, and on the next date only an officer from the examination branch thought it necessary to attend the hearings before us. This alarming percentage of failure may be ascribable to the B.E degree having been condensed to a four years course from the erstwhile five years course; dropping of quality/standards of instruction in the VTU or on account of lack of caring by the faculty of VTU. We would have expected that the VTU to act in the spirit of “loco tutoris” if not in “loco parentis” to reach out to their students and redress or remedy their problems rather than remaining impervious to and unperturbed by this high percentage of failures in a professional course like B.E. 13. We would also like to state that as far as the State of Karnataka is concerned, there are a plethora of Institutions offering various programs of B.E., but lacking in infrastructure both on the teaching side as well as on the non-teaching side. Effective steps are required to be taken in ensuring that quality teachers are appointed to disseminate the various technical subjects in the B.E. Course on ascertaining their qualifications. Also a continuous assessment of the teachers is necessary, in order to ensure that standards are maintained. The Colleges also have to provide adequate and proper hostel and mess facilities to students, who come from all over India to the State in the hope of securing a Professional Degree. While there may be many reasons for the lack of attendance on the part of the students, the disinterest in the subject on account of dull teaching or due to lack of proper living facilities may be some of the factors. 14. Lack of qualified teachers, inadequate teaching and laboratory facilities also hinder the students clearing their subjects in time. All India Council of Technical Education (AICTE), is the Apex Body to determine the standards and regulate Engineering Colleges in the Country. AICTE, on annual inspection, grants affiliation to the Engineering Colleges, the manner in which the inspection is done and affiliation is granted or is continued, casts an important responsibility on AICTE. However, in certain cases, colleges lacking in teaching and other facilities are granted or continued affiliation. AICTE, on annual inspection, grants affiliation to the Engineering Colleges, the manner in which the inspection is done and affiliation is granted or is continued, casts an important responsibility on AICTE. However, in certain cases, colleges lacking in teaching and other facilities are granted or continued affiliation. The students admitted to such colleges would suffer and this may also be a contributing factor for the failures. The VTU is also responsible for ensuring that standards are maintained in its constituent colleges including in the affiliated colleges and take necessary steps to remedy the problems of falling standards in Engineering education in the State. 15. We also wish to remind the students that in order to study a technical course, they must have the requisite attitude for the course and not join it on account of peer pressure or to please their parents, who consider having their wards study in a B.E. course as being a feather in their cap. Many a time, lack of aptitude for a course of study or admission to a course against the wishes of the students would ultimately lead to dis-interest and it may be another reason for lack of attendance. Parents have to ensure that their wards have the requisite aptitude to take up a technical course and not simply push them to study such a course without any interest in the course. We can however only articulate our concern in the hope that it will not fall on deaf ears. Similarly, while not even intending to trammel on educational standards, we are constrained to express our concern on the extremely burdensome, perhaps illogical, stipulation of attendance which ordains that lack of attendance in one subject would lead to disqualification for the entire semester and thereby may result in wasting of one valuable year. As we perceived it, the shortfall in attendance in one subject/course can be made up by devising a method for the same, and if all other subjects are cleared the students would only carry the burden of one failed subject to the next odd semester. 16. In the impugned Order, the learned Single Judge has held that that the Rules and Regulations governing the B.E course in both the Affiliated Colleges as well as Autonomous Colleges must be one and the same; with respect this is not only an impossibility but cannot be seen as an expectation of the law. 16. In the impugned Order, the learned Single Judge has held that that the Rules and Regulations governing the B.E course in both the Affiliated Colleges as well as Autonomous Colleges must be one and the same; with respect this is not only an impossibility but cannot be seen as an expectation of the law. We are also unable to subscribe to the view of the learned Single Judge that a favourable jural dispensation is justified only for the academic year 2011-2012 and not across the board on similar lines. We are further of the opinion that the Court must be circumspect in issuing direction which may be well neigh impossible to implement, such as holding of examination within the short span of a week that too at the University level examination. In any event, we do not find any violation of the mandate of equality enshrined in Article 14 of the Constitution of India, or any other provisions of the Constitution of India or any other law in the differences in the academic regime in the affiliated and autonomous colleges, as complained of in the writ petitions. Higher standards in some institutions require encouragement and emulation, rather than artificial eradication by reduction of educational standards. The availability of arduous and onerous remedies that are to be found in autonomous colleges in the shape of requiring attendance in a third/supplementary semester, does not bestow any unfair benefits to students in the Autonomous Colleges. 17. In these circumstances, the appeals filed by the VTU are allowed. The impugned interim Orders dated 03.09.2012 passed in Writ Petition Nos.30489/2012 connected with W.P. Nos.28129-28228/2012 are set aside and W.A.Nos.5585-86/2012 and W.A.Nos.5596-5693/2012 are allowed. W.A.Nos.5410/2012, 5477-5576/2012 and 5808/2012 are dismissed. So far as the writ petition Nos.36565-37034/2012 are concerned, for the manifold reasons stated above, we find them to be devoid of merit; and accordingly they are dismissed. Parties shall however bear their respective costs. Writ Petition Nos.30489/2012 connected with W.P. Nos.28129-28228/2012 pending before the learned Single Judge be listed for further consideration on 03.10.2012.