Take action against universities offering unspecified degrees: Delhi HC tells UGC

The Delhi High Court has asked the University Grants Commission (UGC) to take action under the law when institutions offer 'unspecified degrees' to students.

A bench of Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma, which was dealing with a public interest litigation on the issue, observed the purpose of providing and publishing specification of degrees approved by the UGC is to maintain uniformity in standard of education and render unspecified degrees 'unrecognised'.

It also noted that the UGC has written to universities to align the degrees being offered by them with the degrees specified by the apex higher education body.

The UGC is mandated to determine and maintain standards of teaching, examination and research in universities, framing regulations on minimum standards of education, monitoring developments in the field of collegiate and university education, and disbursing grants to universities and colleges.

Noting that the UGC has the necessary powers to take appropriate action with regard to unspecified degrees, and such universities are liable for penalty under the UGC Act, the court said no orders are required to be passed.

'However, UGC is directed to take appropriate necessary actions to ensure compliance of the provisions of the UGC Act, 1956,' said the bench, also comprising Justice Sanjeev Narula, in a recent order.

'The purpose of providing specification of degrees approved by the UGC from time to time, which are published on the website by the UGC, is to ensure for all universities and colleges and the students enrolling in such colleges/universities that degrees of students studying unspecified degree courses would render such unspecified degrees unrecognised by the UGC,' the court said.

Petitioner Rahul Mahajan had claimed in his plea that there was inaction by the UGC with respect to universities and colleges providing unspecified courses.

He contended that due to inconsistencies in the laws, rules and regulations of the UGC and alleged lack of accountability, students were being conferred degrees which were not recognised by the UGC. This, he claimed, was resulting in students wasting their time, money and effort for a future that did not exist.

In its order, the court observed that under the law, the UGC has been entrusted with the duty to take such steps as it may deem fit for the promotion and co-ordination of university education and for the determination and maintenance of standards of teaching, examination and research in universities.

It noted the UGC has issued several letters to all universities to ensure they follow the UGC Act with regard to the specification of degrees, and has been taking all necessary measures for strict compliance.

'UGC is competent within its powers to take appropriate action against the Universities and colleges offering such unspecified degrees and such universities are liable for penalty under Section 24 of the UGC Act, 1956,' it said.