ORDER : 1. The petitioners-Manasa Education Trust and five others have filed this writ petition in this Court on 20th March 2017, challenging the communication of respondent-Bangalore University vide Annexure – E dated 07.11.2016, by which, under the directions of the respondent-University Grants Commission, the respondent-University has called upon the petitioners who were running Study Centres affiliated to the respondent-Bangalore University to conduct Correspondence and Distance Education Course run by the respondent-University, to comply with certain directions. 2. The impugned communication (Annexure-E) issued by respondent-Bangalore University on 02.11.2016 stipulates that the respondent-University Grants Commission (in short ‘the UGC’) has not permitted the Bangalore University to admit students to its Distance Education course during the year 2015-16 and to enforce the strict guidelines/instructions issued by Distance Education Bureau (in short ‘DEB’) of UGC, the UGC has permitted these petitioners to be admitted to its Distance Education course for the year 2016-17 only subject to the fulfillment of certain conditions. Vide Para 5 of the said communication, the UGC had asked the respondent-Bangalore University to: (i) Sever its links with all its existing Study Centres (ii) Only Affiliated Colleges will be permitted to serve as study centres with in the Bangalore University Jurisdictional area (iii) Sign fresh Memoranda of Understanding (MOU) with those Affiliated Colleges Principals who are interested in serving as Study Centre. 3. On the basis of the said communication, the petitioners were called upon by the respondent University to furnish the following information to the respondent-University: If your institution is an Affiliated College, and if you wish to continue to function as a Study Centre of the DCC & DE of BU, kindly submit the following documents to the Director, DCC & DE, BU, within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of this letter. (i) Documents pertaining to the ownership of the institution; (ii) Proof of affiliation to BU; (iii) MOU, if any, signed with the DCC & DE of BU by the principal of the College; (iv) Year-wise details of students admitted to the various Distance Education courses of BU; and (v) Letter of intent, indicating your willingness to function as a Study Centre of the DCC & DE of BU, strictly as per the Guidelines/Instruction of the UGC. 4. To the same effect, Annexure-F public notice was also issued by Bangalore University on 24.02.2017. 4. To the same effect, Annexure-F public notice was also issued by Bangalore University on 24.02.2017. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners Study Centres have filed this writ petition. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners urged before the Court that the respondent-UGC has no power to issue such directions in terms of Section 26 of the UGC Act, 1956. 6. On the other hand, the learned counsel for respondent-University has defended the said communication. 7. Having heard the learned counsels for the parties, this Court is satisfied that there is no merit in these writ petitions and the same deserve to be dismissed. 8. The University Grants Act, 1956 has been enacted by Parliament to make provision of Coordination and determining of standards in Universities and Section 26 of the said Act gives powers to make regulations to the University Grants Commission. Section 26 (f) and (g) are quoted below for ready reference: 26. Power to make regulations.(1) The Commission may, by notification in the Official Gazette, make regulations consistent with this Act and the rules made there under. (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.” 9. It is clear from the bare reading of the said provisions that the UGC has power to keep down the minimum standards of instruction for grant of any degree by any University and the UGC has also power to maintain the standards and the coordination of work and facilities in Universities. 10. In order to regulate the Distance Education course, if the respondent-UGC has instructed the colleges to ensure minimum standards of Distance Education and consequently, the respondent-Bangalore University has called upon the petitioner – Study Centres to furnish the requisite information vide Annexure-E-communication dated 07.11.2016, the petitioners cannot challenge the same. Nothing arbitrary or illegal is there if fresh information or MOU is sought by the respondent-Bangalore University in the said communication. Nothing arbitrary or illegal is there if fresh information or MOU is sought by the respondent-Bangalore University in the said communication. If the petitioners are not ready and willing to abide by the standards and comply with the requirements raised by the respondents, they are free to close down the Distance Education Centres which were permitted to be conducted through them by the respondent-Bangalore University, but the petitioners cannot be permitted to challenge the minimum educational standards to be set and ensured by the respondents in this regard. This Court is not an Expert body to intervene in the matters pertaining to educational standards. 11. The writ petitions are, therefore, devoid of any merit and accordingly, they are hereby dismissed. No costs.