✦ High Court of India · 19 Mar 2025

High Court · 2025

Case Details High Court of India · 19 Mar 2025

Court

High Court of India

Decided

19 Mar 2025

Bench

N.MALA

Length

1,898 words

Acts & Sections

Constitution of India University Grants Commission Act 1956

W.P.No.8149 of 2025IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 19.03.2025CORAM:THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE.N.MALA W.P.No.8149 of 2025and WMP.No.9126 of 2025 PPG Institute of Technology, Rep. by its Principal, NH – 209, Sathy Main Road, Saravanampatti, Coimbatore – 641 035.... PetitionerVs.1.University Grants Commission, Rep. by its Secretary, Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi – 110 002.2.Anna University, Rep. by its Registrar, Chennai – 600 025.… RespondentsPrayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the impugned order of the second respondent in Procs.No.007/AU/CAC/Aut.Status/2024-2025 dated 03.02.2025, quash the same and consequently direct the second respondent herein to forthwith notify the autonomous status granted to the petitioner College in the order of the first respondent in No.F.2-10/2023 (AC-Policy) dated 09.09.2024 in line with the 1/12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.8149 of 2025Judgment rendered in W.A.No.51 of 2020 as confirmed in S.L.P.(Civil) Nos.8324-8325 of 2020. For Petitioner: Mr.S.RaveekumarFor R1 : Mr.B.Rabu Manohar, Standing CounselFor R2 : Mr.U.Baranidharan, Standing Counsel* * * * *O R D E RThis Writ Petition is filed to call for the records of the impugned order of the second respondent in Procs.No.007/AU/CAC/ Aut.Status/2024-2025 dated 03.02.2025, quash the same and consequently direct the second respondent herein to forthwith notify the autonomous status granted to the petitioner College in the order of the first respondent in No.F.2-10/2023 (AC-Policy) dated 09.09.2024, in line with the Judgment rendered in W.A.No.51 of 2020 as confirmed in S.L.P.(Civil) Nos.8324-8325 of 2020. 2.The petitioner college was founded in the year 2008-09, by P.Perichi Gounder Memorial Charitable Trust, with the approval of UGC and the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE). The petitioner college is affiliated with the second respondent, Anna University and offers eight UG courses and two PG courses. The Institution is recognised by the UGC under 2/12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.8149 of 2025Section 2(f) of the University Grants Commission Act of 1956, and is accredited with an A Grade by the national Assessment and Accreditation Council (NAAC), with a CGPA of 3.11. The petitioner Institution applied to UGC for the conferment of autonomous status in accordance with the UGC's regulations for colleges. As the petitioner college confirmed to all the eligibility criteria as outlined in University Grants Commission (Conferment of Autonomous Status Upon Colleges and Measures for Maintenance of Standards in Autonomous Colleges) Regulation, 2023, the UGC, in its meeting held on 27.08.2024, approved the conferment of autonomous status to the petitioner for a period of ten years starting from the academic year 2024-2025 to 2033- 2034. On 09.09.2024, the UGC communicated its decision to Anna University, urging it to issue a notification within 30 days to declare the Autonomous Status of the petitioner college. Despite the request and a reminder submitted by the petitioner on 13.12.2024, the second respondent, Anna University failed to issue the required notification. On 08.01.2025, in the 273rd Meeting of the Syndicate of the University, it was resolved to approve conferment of autonomous status only to PSG Institute of Technology and applied research, Coimbatore, as per the Anna University Statutes, on the Academic Matters 2023, ignoring completely the petitioner college's request. The 2nd respondent without properly considering the facts, issued a communication to the petitioner in 3/12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.8149 of 2025Procs.No.007/AU/CAC/Aut.Status, dated 03.02.2025, stating that the petitioner satisfied only 'TWO' out of 'SEVEN' requirements prescribed in its Statutes on Academic Matters, 2023, and therefore aggrieved by the impugned order dated 03.02.2025, the petitioner filed the above writ petition for the aforesaid relief. 3.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the impugned order of the second respondent was illegal, arbitrary and against the procedure established by law. The learned counsel further submitted that the second respondent, was bound to implement the decision of the first respondent, of granting autonomous status to the petitioner. The learned counsel submitted that the second respondent could not sit in appeal over the decision of the first respondent. The learned counsel relied on the Judgment of the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in Anna University Vs. Mahendra Institute of Technology and Another in W.A.No.51 of 2020, wherein this Court held that whenever, there is an approval or grant of autonomous status by the UGC, the Anna University must issue the notification within 30 days and must not wait for the Institutions to approach the Court. The learned counsel submitted that the law was settled that the Anna University, had no authority to intervene in the grant of autonomous status, by the UGC, and it was bound to notify the autonomous status, granted to the petitioner College, as per Regulation 4.2 of UGC 4/12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.8149 of 2025Regulations, 2023. The learned counsel therefore submitted that the impugned order deserved to be set aside and the writ petition allowed. 4.The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the second respondent/Anna University submitted that as the petitioner had satisfied only 'TWO' out of 'SEVEN' requirements prescribed in the Statutes on Academic Matters, 2023, of Anna University, the impugned order was passed and therefore the same could not be faulted. The second respondent further submitted that though the recommendations of the University, were submitted to the UGC through Web Portal on time as prescribed in the UGC Regulations, it was not taken into consideration, while granting the Autonomous Status to the petitioner College. The learned counsel further submitted that the criteria prescribed by the Anna University were in addition to the prescribed requirements of the UGC and therefore the impugned order could not be faulted.5. The University Grants Commission in its meeting held on 27.08.2024, approved the recommendation of Standing Committee on Autonomous Colleges, to confer the autonomous status to the petitioner's College for a period of 10 years from the academic year 2024-2025 to 2033-2034 as per Clause 7.5 of the UGC Regulations, 2023. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 5/12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.8149 of 2025first respondent UGC, submitted that the second respondent, Anna University, was bound to notify the Autonomous Status of the petitioner's College as per Regulation 4.2 of UGC Regulations, 2023 and could not override the same by imposing its own statutes.6.I have heard both the learned counsels and I have perused the materials placed on record. 7.The crux of the issue is whether the 2nd respondent, is justified in refusing to notify the autonomous status of the petitioner college conferred by the UGC, by imposing its own statutes on the petitioner college. It will be relevant in this aspect to refer to the UGC Regulation, 2023, particularly Regulations 4.1 and 4.2 which read as follows: “4.1) To examine the application of the College for autonomous status on the UGC portal and give its recommendations, along with reasons/justification, within 30 working days on the UGC portal. If the University does not respond on the UGC Portal within 30 working days, it shall be presumed that the parent University has no objection to the processing of the application by the UGC for conferment of autonomous status.4.2) Issue notification within 30 days for a College to 6/12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.8149 of 2025function as an autonomous entity once the autonomous status is conferred on the College by UGC.” 8.From the above regulation, it is very clear that once the UGC has conferred the autonomous status to the college, the second respondent is bound to issue the notification within 30 days as per Clause 4.2 aforementioned. The proposal of the College was examined in the light of eligibility criteria prescribed in Clause 6 of the UGC Regulations, 2023, and approval was recommended by the Standing Committee of UGC. Conferment of Autonomous statues to the college was approved by the UGC in its meeting held on 27.08.2024, for a period of 10 years, starting from academic year 2024-2025 to 2033-2034. The UGC vide it's communication 09.09.2024, also directed the second respondent/Anna University to issue the notification within 30 days. The second respondent/Anna University vide the impugned order, refused to notify the Autonomous Status of the petitioner College, on the ground that the petitioner's College, satisfied only 'TWO' out of 'SEVEN' conditions prescribed in its Statutes on Academic Matters, 2023. At this juncture, it would be appropriate to refer to the Division Bench Judgment of this Court in the case of Anna University Vs. Mahendra Institute of Technology and Another in W.A.No.51 of 2020, which reads as follows: 7/12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.8149 of 2025“14.In the said background, we are of the opinion that the 2018 Regulations framed by the University Grants Commission in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 12(f), (g), (j) r/w 26(1) of the University Grants Commission Act, 1956 govern the field, inasmuch as the same is clearly saved as being a Regulation duly authorized having its source in Entry 66 of List I of the Constitution of India. There is no law for the time being relating to the Regulation of grant of autonomous Colleges running contrary to the same either framed under Entry 66 of List I or entry 25 of List III. In the absence of any such legislation to the contrary, we are of the clear opinion that the 2018 Regulations clearly hold the field exclusively in the matters of grant of autonomous status to affiliated Colleges. The resolution of the Syndicate dated 27.05.2014 cannot in any way be said to have an overriding effect or even supplementary effect to the 2018 Regulations, inasmuch as the method of grant of an autonomous status is clearly defined under the 2018 Regulations and the eligibility to obtain such status is also governed by the same.” 9.The aforesaid Judgment of the Hon'ble First Division Bench was confirmed by the Supreme Court in S.L.P.(Civil) Nos.8324-8325 of 2020. From a reading of the aforementioned Regulation and the Judgment of the Hon'ble First Division Bench of this Court, it is clear that the second respondent 8/12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.8149 of 2025University, cannot over ride the UGC Regulations, but it is bound to issue the notification as mandated by Regulation 4.2 of the UGC Regulations 2023, as the petitioner College satisfied the criteria laid down in Clause 6 of the UGC Regulation, 2023. It is pertinent to note here that the objections of the second respondent University, were rejected by the UGC stating that it could not override the criteria prescribed in UGC Regulations, 2023. In the light of the law declared by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and our High Court and on the facts of the present case, I am of the view that the impugned order cannot be sustained and hence it is quashed.10.I am therefore of the view that the Writ Petition deserves to be allowed. Hence, the Writ Petition is allowed with a direction to the second respondent University to notify the autonomous status granted to the petitioner Colleges as per Regulation 4.2 of the UCG Regulations 2023, within a period of four weeks, from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. 19.03.2025Index: Yes / NoInternet: Yes / No9/12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.8149 of 2025Speaking order/Non-speaking orderah/dsn To1.University Grants Commission, Rep. by its Secretary, Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, 10/12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.8149 of 2025 New Delhi – 110 002.2.Anna University, Rep. by its Registrar, Chennai – 600 025.3.The Principal, PPG Institute of Technology, NH – 209, Sathy Main Road, Saravanampatti, Coimbatore – 641 035.N.MALA, J.ah11/12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.8149 of 2025W.P.No.8149 of 202519.03.202512/12

Find similar cases Start drafting free

This is the original judgment text as indexed from the source corpus. Always verify against the official court record before relying on it in a filing — you can do so on eCourts or the Supreme Court of India website. ← Search more judgments

More cases under Constitution of India