<p>Delhi High Court ruled on Tuesday that Indira Gandhi National Open University (IGNOU) has no legal authority either to set up or accord recognition to an institution or college to impart face-to-face regular education. <br /><br /></p>.<p>IGNOU, set up to promote distance education, was dragged to the court by various institutions, including Hindustan Aviation Academy, which was first allowed by the University to run BTech and diploma courses in Aerospace Engineering. <br /><br />However, IGNOU later noticed that its approval to run face-to-face programme did not meet legal requirements and asked the approved institutes to keep the admission process at abeyance. <br /><br />IGNOU also noticed that the necessary prior approval from All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE ) for running such courses was also not taken.<br /><br />Disposing of a bunch of petitions of institutions, justice V K Jain said, “Since IGNOU had no legal authority to set up or recognise institutions/colleges on the lines of regular colleges where education is imparted by way of face-to-face programmes, requiring students to compulsorily attend classes, the petitioners’ institutes cannot be said to be institutions, constituent colleges, units or affiliated colleges of IGNOU, nor can they be said study centres within the meaning of the IGNOU Act.”<br /><br />Students in dark<br /><br />The court also rapped IGNOU for not informing students about its decision to suspend admission for academic years 2012-13. <br /><br />It also said that the university also did not follow the principles of natural justice while restraining institutes from taking admissions as no show cause notice was served on them in this regard.<br /><br />The court, in its 37-page judgement, said, “The respondent university is clearly guilty of gross negligence and inaction. No attempt was taken by it to ensure that students who in the absence of public notice from the university, could not be expected to be aware of its decision to suspend admission for the academic years 2012-13, did not pay fees to petitioners' institutes and did not take admission.” <br /></p>
<p>Delhi High Court ruled on Tuesday that Indira Gandhi National Open University (IGNOU) has no legal authority either to set up or accord recognition to an institution or college to impart face-to-face regular education. <br /><br /></p>.<p>IGNOU, set up to promote distance education, was dragged to the court by various institutions, including Hindustan Aviation Academy, which was first allowed by the University to run BTech and diploma courses in Aerospace Engineering. <br /><br />However, IGNOU later noticed that its approval to run face-to-face programme did not meet legal requirements and asked the approved institutes to keep the admission process at abeyance. <br /><br />IGNOU also noticed that the necessary prior approval from All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE ) for running such courses was also not taken.<br /><br />Disposing of a bunch of petitions of institutions, justice V K Jain said, “Since IGNOU had no legal authority to set up or recognise institutions/colleges on the lines of regular colleges where education is imparted by way of face-to-face programmes, requiring students to compulsorily attend classes, the petitioners’ institutes cannot be said to be institutions, constituent colleges, units or affiliated colleges of IGNOU, nor can they be said study centres within the meaning of the IGNOU Act.”<br /><br />Students in dark<br /><br />The court also rapped IGNOU for not informing students about its decision to suspend admission for academic years 2012-13. <br /><br />It also said that the university also did not follow the principles of natural justice while restraining institutes from taking admissions as no show cause notice was served on them in this regard.<br /><br />The court, in its 37-page judgement, said, “The respondent university is clearly guilty of gross negligence and inaction. No attempt was taken by it to ensure that students who in the absence of public notice from the university, could not be expected to be aware of its decision to suspend admission for the academic years 2012-13, did not pay fees to petitioners' institutes and did not take admission.” <br /></p>