Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 904 (MP)

Vaibhav Pratap Singh v. Union of India

2017-08-11

S.K.AWASTHI, SANJAY YADAV

body2017
ORDER : SANJAY YADAV, J. 1. Petitioners who are undergoing the Master of Business Administration (Two Years) Degree Course for the academic year 2016–2018 from Indian Institute of Tourism and Travel Management, respondent No. 4, have approached this Court vide present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for a declaration that the courses offered by the respondent No. 4 viz. MBA Tourism and Travel, International Business Tourism and Cargo, Tourism Services are without authority of law, without affiliation from the All India Council of Technical Education (AICTE) and the University Grants Commission (UGC). Further declaration is sought that, the degree offered in MBA is illegal. Respondents No. 1 to 3 be directed to take action against respondent No. 4 and its authorities. That respondent No. 4 be directed to refund the fee charged for academic year 2016–2018 and compensate each of the petitioners with? 5 Lakhs. 2. The allegation are that respondent No. 4 has admitted the students for the said Degree Course which is neither being recognized nor affiliated with the AICTE and the UGC. That later-on after taking admissions it came to the knowledge of the petitioner that the course is being offered by the Indira Gandhi National Tribal University (IGNTU) which is constituted vide the Indira Gandhi National Tribal University Act, 2007 (for brevity ‘Act of 2007’) with an object to establish and incorporate a teaching and affiliating University at Amarkantak in the State of Madhya Pradesh to facilitate and promote avenues of higher education and research facilities for the Tribal population in India and to provide the matters connected therewith on incidental thereto. It is the contention of each of the petitioners that they were lured to take admission with the brochure published by respondent No. 4 disclosing thereby that the course is being offered under Memorandum of Undertaking with the IGNTU. However, later-on the AICTE issued a public notice that no technical education can be offered without prior affiliation by the AICTE, and on information sought from the Central Government it was informed that no permission has been granted by the UGC or AICTE to conduct the course in question. However, later-on the AICTE issued a public notice that no technical education can be offered without prior affiliation by the AICTE, and on information sought from the Central Government it was informed that no permission has been granted by the UGC or AICTE to conduct the course in question. It is urged that since imperative it is to have affiliation from the UGC and the AICTE, the respondent No. 4 without having such affiliation or permission has committed an illegality in inviting application and giving admission to the course in question, because of which the petitioners have a bleak future as the degree offered will have no recognition. On these grounds, petitioners have filed this petition. 3. Before adverting to the respective stand by the respondents, their statutory status is taken note of. 4. Respondent No. 2 is an organization brought in vogue by virtue of the University Grants Commission Act, 1956 (for brevity ‘Act of 1956’). It is established under section 4 of the Act of 1956 with an object to make provision for the coordination and determination of standards in institutions for higher education or Research and Scientific and Technical Institutions. Section 3 provides that 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 the 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. Section 12 envisages its function that, it shall be its general duty 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 determination and maintenance of standards of teaching, examination and research in Universities, and for the purpose of performing its functions under the Act. Section 23 of the Act of 1956 provides for that no institution, whether a Corporate body or not, other than a University established or incorporated by or under a Central Act, a Provincial Act or a State Act shall be entitled to have the word “University” associated with its name in any manner whatsoever. 5. Section 23 of the Act of 1956 provides for that no institution, whether a Corporate body or not, other than a University established or incorporated by or under a Central Act, a Provincial Act or a State Act shall be entitled to have the word “University” associated with its name in any manner whatsoever. 5. Respondent No. 3 All India Council of Technical Education is an establishment constituted under section 3 of the All India Council for Technical Education Act, 1987 (for brevity ‘Act of 1987’) with a view to proper planning and coordinated development of the technical education system throughout the country, the promotion of qualitative improvements of such education in relation to planned quantitative growth and the regulation and proper maintenance of norms and standard in the technical education system and for matters connected therewith. As per section 10 of Act of 1987 it shall be its (Council) duty to take all such steps as it may think fit for ensuring coordinated and integrated development of technical education and maintenance of standards and for the purposes of performing its functions under the Act of 1987. 6. Respondent No. 5 Indira Gandhi National Tribal University is established and incorporated under the Indira Gandhi National Tribal University Act, 2007 with an object to facilitate and promote avenues of higher education and research facilities for the Tribal population in India and to provide for matters connected therewith on incidental thereto. 6. Respondent No. 5 Indira Gandhi National Tribal University is established and incorporated under the Indira Gandhi National Tribal University Act, 2007 with an object to facilitate and promote avenues of higher education and research facilities for the Tribal population in India and to provide for matters connected therewith on incidental thereto. The object of the University is further elaborated under section 4 of the Act of 2007, to provide avenues of higher education and research facilities primarily for the Tribal Population of India; to disseminate and advance knowledge by providing instructional and research facilities in tribal art, culture, tradition, Language, medicinal systems, customs, forest based economic activities, flora, fauna and advancement in technologies relating to the natural resources of the tribal areas; to collaborate with national and international universities or organisations, specially for undertaking cultural studies and research on tribal populations; to formulate tribal centric development models, publish reports and monographs; and to organise conferences; seminars on issues relating to tribes; and to provide inputs to policy matters in different spheres; to take appropriate measures for promoting, the members of tribal communities capable of managing, administering and looking after their own needs by access to higher education through a University of their own; to disseminate and advance knowledge by providing instructional and research facilities in such other branches of learning as it may deem fit; to take appropriate measures for promoting innovations in teaching learning processes in inter-disciplinary studies and research;, and to pay special attention to the improvement of the social, educational and economic conditions and welfare of the Scheduled Tribes within the Union of India, their intellectual, academic and cultural development. That clause (vii) and (xi) of section 5 specifically empowers the IGNTU to recognize an institution of higher learning for such purposes as the University may determine and to withdraw such recognition and to cooperate or collaborate or associate with any other University or Authority or Institution of higher learning in such manner and for such purposes as the University may determine. 7. Respondent No. 4, Indian Institute of Tourism and Travel Management is an organization of Ministry of Tourism, Govt, of India, established in the year 1983. The management of the institute is entrusted in the Board of Governors having the Union Minister for Tourism as its Chairman. It has its headquarters at Gwalior with four centres located at Bhubaneshwar, Noida, Goa and Nellore. The management of the institute is entrusted in the Board of Governors having the Union Minister for Tourism as its Chairman. It has its headquarters at Gwalior with four centres located at Bhubaneshwar, Noida, Goa and Nellore. That the institute offered two years full time Master of Business Administration (Tourism) Programme for the year 2016–2018 with the clear stipulation in brochure that the programme is as per the Memorandum of Understanding with IGNTU-Ministry of Human Resources Development, Govt, of India. 8. It is this course which has come under fire from the students who took admission to the course apprehending that, they may not get valid degree because the course is not recognized or affiliated with the UGC and AICTE. The impression is gathered from the answer to the query made by one Shri Manoj Pratap Singh Yadav, brought on record as Annexure P/5, whereby in reply to: whether the course conducted by respondent No. 4 is approved by UGC, it has been informed that the UGC has not granted any approval. The petitioners have also relied on the public notice issued by the AICTE (Annexure A/4), whereby it is informed that all institutions offering Technical Education Programmes with or without a University affiliation in any form are advised to seek the prior approval of AICTE. Otherwise the Technical Education Programmes offered through such institution shall be notified as unapproved programmes. 9. The apprehension at the first blush does leave an impression that the course in question is being conducted contrary to the norms laid down by the UGC and AICTE. However, when reply from respective organization viz. UGC, AICTE and the Union of India is considered, the apprehension raised on behalf of the petitioner is found to be baseless. 10. Respondent No. 4 in its return has stated on oath that it being a Central Government Organization is an autonomous body having its Board of Governor and Minister of Department is the Chairman of Board of Governor and Vice Chairman is Secretary of the Department of Tourism. The academic staff and other requirement are to be fulfilled as per UGC norms and the capital fund are provided by Union of India and day to day expenditure are borne by the Institute and in exercise of the powers conferred, the Institute is running the course. The academic staff and other requirement are to be fulfilled as per UGC norms and the capital fund are provided by Union of India and day to day expenditure are borne by the Institute and in exercise of the powers conferred, the Institute is running the course. It is urged that Post Graduate Degree Course i.e. M.B.A. is conducted by IGNTU and is an approved programme by University Grants Commission. It is further urged that the IGNTU does not require affiliation from AICTE and with the Centre of Higher Studies as provided under the Act of AICTE 1987. It is contended that as per provisions contained under section 5(xi) of the Act of 2007 it is within the competence of the IGNTU to conduct such course after collaborating with the institute of higher studies and for the same no affiliation of the AICTE is required. It is further urged that there is clear and specific mention in the brochure that the course and the degree will be granted by IGNTU. It is accordingly urged that entire petition is misconceived and have no legal basis. 11. On behalf of Union of India, it is contended that the allegation that the IITTM, a Central Government owned organization cannot impart the course in M.B.A. Tourism is denied. It is stated that being an autonomous organization, IITTM entered into a Memorandum of Understanding to start two years MBA (Tourism) programme for the academic session 2015–2017 in collaboration with IGNTU and since the said University can collaborate as per section 5(xi) of 2007 Act, which such collaboration it is a course conducted by the IGNTU and the degree on completion of the programme is to be awarded by the IGNTU and not by IITTM. Clause (2) of the Memorandum of Understanding (Annexure R/13) has been relied upon which mentions “That the IGNTU will award the mark sheets and the degree for the programme to the successful students as per the existing nomenclature clearly mentioning the collaboration with IITTM.” It is further contended that since the mark-sheet and degree is to be given the IGNTU which is a Central University, IITTM is not required to take any permission from the UGC or the AICTE. It is further contended that UGC approved MBA (Tourism and Travel Management) Programme being conducted by the IGNTU and by the IITTM with same nomenclature and since the nomenclature has been changed by the UGC from MBA (Toursim) to MBA (Tourism & Travel Management) in the year 2016, the said nomenclature has been adhered by the IGNTU and the IITTM. Reliance is placed on the communication dated 30-7-2015 and 25-11-2016 (Annexure R-1/7) by the IGNTU. Dispelling the apprehension on behalf of the petitioner which cropped up because of the RTI information that no approval has been granted by the UGC to the IITTM, it is urged that mischievously the query sought was ‘Whether any approval was given by the UGC to IITTM or the IGNTU for running collaboration programme’ and not ‘Whether any permission was required from UGC to him a collaborative programme.’ It is urged that since IGNTU is a Central University brought in vogue by virtue of enactment of 2007, it was not incumbent upon it to have sought prior approval of the UGC before entering into collaboration. On these submissions, respondent No. 1 seeks dismissal of the petition. 12. Respondent No. 5-IGNTU on its turn has supported the stand taken by the Union of India and the IITTM it is contended that being a Central University constituted under the Act of 2007 having powers under section 5 to recognize an institution of higher learning for such purposes as the University may determine and to withdraw such recognition and to co-operate or collaborate or associate with any other University or authority or Institution of higher learning in such manner and for such purposes as the University may determine and after duly verifying that respondent No. 4 is already rendering and providing education in respect of Tourism and Travel Management programme and that it is an expert body duly recognized and formed by the Union of India having good infrastructure and other facilities a Memorandum of Understanding/Collaboration was entered into it with respondent No. 4, whereby it was decided that the respondent No. 4-Institution may run the course namely M.B.A. (Tourism) with specialization in Travel Trade, Leisure, International Tourism Business, Services, Cargo, International Tourism Business-logistic with sub/super specialization as per approved courses with a total intake of 618 on various terms and conditions under which such course were to be conducted. It is further contended that the IGNTU is being run under the guidance of UGC. It is urged that section 12 the powers and function of UGC and section 12-A of Act of 1956 provides for specified courses of the studies and that sub-section (3) of section 22 envisages that for the purpose of said section ‘degree’ means any such degree as may with the previous approval of the Central Government be specified in this behalf by the Commission by notification in the official Gazette. It is further contended that a notification has been issued by the UGC in exercise of its powers under subsection (3) of section 22 of Act of 1956 (brought on record as Annexure R/5-3), whereby it is notified that the Universities who have taken accent from the UGC can issue degree of the said course. It is urged that the said notification was issued in March, 2016, whereby at S. No. 53, the Masters of Tourism and Travel Management Degree can be given. It is further submitted that vide notification the nomenclature of MTA has been clarified and changed to MBA (Tourism and Travel Management). Accordingly, it is urged that, the course which is conducted by the IGNTU is duly recognized by the UGC and since respondent No. 4 College has collaborated no further recognition is required by the said College for running the course. It is further contended that the entire course undertaking by IITTM is being monitored by respondent No. 5-IGNTU. The admission test as well as syllabus is being approved by it and thereafter finalization of the curriculum, paper setting, theory examination and practical examination and the results are declared by IGNTU. The evaluation of the papers has also been done by the IGNTU and the mark-sheet and degree will be issued by the IGNTU. It is further contended that since degree is to be granted by IGNTU, there is no need of prior permission to take any approval from UGC or AICTE. Relying upon the communication dated 4th January, 2017 (brought on record as Annexure R/5-4) by the UGC addressed to Shri Kanti Prasad Gautam on his application under RTI Act 2005, it is urged that it is clarified by the UGC that IGNTU is an autonomous institution established by an Act of Parliament. The IGNTU is governed by the Act, statute and ordinances framed thereunder. The IGNTU is governed by the Act, statute and ordinances framed thereunder. Therefore, as per the provision of the Act and statute, the University has to make ordinance and seek approval of the Government of India. It is further contended that the ordinance as has been framed and sent for approval of Government of India and UGC and matter is under process. It is further contended that though no further approval is required from the UGC by the INGTU for running course yet the approval has been sought and granted by the UGC. It is further contended that a clarification has also been given on 25-11-2016 to the Director IITTM, the respondent No. 4 that, the Department of Tourism Management, faculty of Commerce and Management, runs the approved two years MBA (Tourism and Travel Management Programme) in the Amarkantak Campus, meaning thereby that, the IGNTU is running its own programme in the institution, therefore, affiliation is not required and the IGNTU is not required to take any affiliation from AICTE for collaboration. On these submissions, respondent No. 5 seeks dismissal of the petition. 13. Respondents No. 2 and 3 UGC and AICTE have filed the separate return. In the return filed by the UGC on 8-2-2017, it is stated that the Memorandum of Understanding was entered into between IITTM and IGNTU for collaboration to run the course M.B.A. (Tourism & Travel Management) at IITTM meets all the provisions and is in line with Act of 2007. It is urged that the Chairman, AICTE, while implementing the order dated 17-4-2014 and 9-5-2014 of the Supreme Court of India in SLP (C) No. 7277/2014, Orissa Technical College Association v. AICTE, wrote to the Vice Chancellor of all the Universities regarding the requirement of prior approval of AICTE at item No. 6 of said communication. It is mentioned that approval of AICTE is necessary in respect of existing affiliated colleges or the colleges which will require affiliation by University to conduct Technical Course/Programme. It is contended that since IGNTU is a autonomous institution established by an Act of Parliament and is governed by an Act of Parliament and is governed by the Act, Statues and Ordinances framed thereunder no indulgence is warranted from the UGC. 14. It is contended that since IGNTU is a autonomous institution established by an Act of Parliament and is governed by an Act of Parliament and is governed by the Act, Statues and Ordinances framed thereunder no indulgence is warranted from the UGC. 14. In the return filed by the respondent No. 3-AICTE on 19-5-2017 a stand was taken in paragraph 7 that AICTE is an authority to grant approval to run any of the technical education or course, therefore, courses offered by the respondent No. 4-Institution without getting prior approval from AICTE is absolutely without authority of law as the respondent No. 4 institution does not fall within ambit of University and deemed University as per the provisions of the Act of 1956. However, later-on realizing the fact that the respondents No. 4 and 5 have entered into MOU as per the provisions contained in Act of 2007, a revised return has been filed by the respondent No. 7 on 15-6-2017 stating therein that the Public Notice (Annexed P-4) was brought out for approval process by the AICTE, Respondent No. 3 whereby the applications were invited for approval from all technical institutions including affiliated technical colleges and also new technical colleges which will require affiliation by a University/concerned Board of Technical Education for conducting technical programme for the Academic Session 2017-18. The respondent No. 4, IITTM institution is an organization of Ministry of Tourism, Govt, of India of higher learning. IITM, Respondent No. 4 signed an MOU with respondent No. 5, IGNTU which has been established under the Indira Gandhi National Tribal University Act, 2007 which is a Central University with National Jurisdiction. The MBA (TTM) Programme being run at India Institute of Tourism and Travel Management (IITTM) is a IGNTU programme for which entrance examination for admission to this Programme is conducted by IGNTU only by bringing out an advertisement prominently displaying the name of IGNTU on the top of the advertisement. The curriculum for the programme is decided by IGNTU and examinations for this programme are controlled and conducted under the supervision of IGNTU and degrees are awarded by it and according to IGNTU the respondent No. 4-IITTM is not an affiliated institutions of IGNTU. The curriculum for the programme is decided by IGNTU and examinations for this programme are controlled and conducted under the supervision of IGNTU and degrees are awarded by it and according to IGNTU the respondent No. 4-IITTM is not an affiliated institutions of IGNTU. Section 5 of the Act of 2007 empowered respondent No. 5 University to recognize and institution of higher learning for such purposes as the University may determine and to withdraw such recognition; and further also to co-operate or collaborate or associate with any other University or authority or Institution of higher learning in such manner and for such purposes as the University may determine. The respondent No. 4, IITTM is conducting MBA (TTM) Programme in collaboration with India Gandhi National Tribal University as per MOU signed by them and it is not an affiliated institution of the University. In view of the aforesaid statutory provisions of IGNTU Act and establishment of respondent 5 IGNTU as well as having collaboration signed with respondent No. 4 to run the course in question, as well having the autonomous status. The UGC in its return has specifically stated that an autonomous institution which is established by an Act of the Parliament, IGNTU does not require any approval from the answering respondent (UGC). 15. These contention on behalf of respective respondents and the various provisions of the enactment namely Act of 1956, Act of 1987 and Act of 2007 leaves no iota of doubt that the course which has been offered by the respondent No. 4-IITTM is not by the said Institution but is a course run by the IGNTU a Central University which besides managing the course will also issue the mark-sheet and degree. This fact thus dispel the apprehension raised on behalf of the students that they are being mislead by taking admission in IITTM to undergo the course which is not recognized. In other words, as the course which the petitioners are undertaking is duly recognized by the respective Statutory Authorities and the statute and mark-sheet and degree is to be awarded by the University i.e. IGNTU, we find no substance in the apprehension raised on behalf of the petitioners as would warrants any indulgence. 16. Consequently, the petition is disposed of finally in above terms.