IP University Affiliated Private Colleges Can’t Charge Higher Fee From Students Admitted Through 10% Management Quota Seats: Delhi High Court

Observing that malpractices and backdoor entry into admissions in professional courses is not unknown in society, the Delhi High Court has said that transparent and merit based admission process needs to be encouraged as it encourages students to work hard and “realise their potential in their academic pursuits.”

Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav said that such a process also ensures that the “brightest and most talented students” are given the opportunity to study in educational institutions, which promotes excellence.

“The selection of students should always be based on their academic aptitude and other qualifications, rather than extraneous factors such as personal connections, wealth or social status or other resources of getting limited information of admission notice,” the court said.

The court made the observations while hearing a bunch of pleas moved by various private institutions affiliated to Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University challenging the validity of three circulars issued by the Delhi Government and the varsity in September and October last year.

Vide the first circular, the Delhi Government’s Directorate of Education issued directions to the Vice Chancellor of the University with respect to the admissions against 10% Management Seats in private institutions affiliated to the varsity.

Vide the second circular, the University issued directions regarding online registration for Management Quota admissions on its portal and the display of merit list. Vide the third circular, the varsity issued the Schedule for Online Registration for Management Seats Admissions for B. Tech.

The impugned circulars were challenged on the ground of violation of Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India and the same being issued without any jurisdiction and authority of law.

Apart from the affiliated private institutions, three other petitions were filed by various students seeking admission in the private unaided institutions against the 10% Management Quota seats.

The question before the court was whether the impugned circulars casted any restriction on the fundamental right of the private institutions in admitting students against the 10% Management Quota Seats in accordance with Delhi Professional Colleges or Institutions (Prohibition of Capitation Fee, Regulation of Admission, Fixation of Non-Exploitative Fee and Other Measures to Ensure Equity and Excellence) Act, 2007 and the Rules made thereunder.

Upholding the validity of the impugned circulars, Justice Kaurav said that the regulation of admission in a fair, transparent and non-exploitative manner is the heart and soul of Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India.

The court also said that neither the private institutions nor anyone else would have any grievance with respect to maintaining fairness and transparency and ensuring non-exploitative procedure for admission.

“If the University displays the information relating to the branch wise and college wise seats of Management Quota, by no stretch of imagination the same can be said to be any restriction on the rights of the private institutions to admit students against the 10% Management Quota,” the court said.

Observing that malpractices, maladministration and non-transparent admission processes are antithetical to Article 14, the court added:

“This right is recognised as the service is based on 'no profit no loss' principal. The private institutions cannot claim that they generate additional revenue from their 10% seats, as the fee structure for all students is common. There should not be any reason as to why 10% seats should not be filled up amongst most meritorious available students.”

The court said that the private institutions are not entitled to charge any higher fees from the students admitted through the 10% Management Quota Seats students than the fee being charged from 90% students.

“Thus, the same fee structure is applicable to both the categories. Therefore, so long as merit is not being diluted by the impugned Circulars, the institutions ideally should not have any grievance. It is not their case that admissions are guided by the paying capacity of the candidates. The institutions are also under an obligation to maintain merit and transparency under the proviso to Section 13 of the Act of 2007,” Justice Kaurav observed.

The court concluded that the impugned circulars nowhere prescribe any other criteria for judging the merit than the one prescribed under applicable rules or regulations. It added that the circulars did not take away the right of such institutions to admit students up to the sanctioned intake capacity or compel them to compromise with merit or excellence.

“The efforts made by the DHE and the University are only with an aim to ensure that there should be large participation of the students in a fair and transparent manner. The information with respect to seat matrix and counselling etc. must be disseminated to all concerned. The University‘s Circulars do not substitute the procedure enunciated in Rule 8 of the Rules of 2007,” the court said.

The court dismissed the petitions moved by the private unaided institution. However, it partly allowed one of the pleas moved by various students who were already admitted against the 10% Management Quota Seats by Maharaja Suraj Mal Institute of Technology but their admission was not ratified.

“The admissions of the Petitioners are regularised. However, the Management Quota Seats for the Academic Session 2023-2024 of MSIT stand reduced to Nil,” the court said while disposing of the petition.

Title: VIVEKANANDA INSTITUTE OF PROFESSIONAL STUDIES- TECHNICAL CAMPUS v. GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. and other connected matters

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 412

Click Here To Read Order