Summary

The present order was delivered by Uday U. Lalit, J. on behalf of the Bench comprising Justices Adarsh Kumar Goel and Uday U. Lalit, on January 22, 2018. These applications had been preferred seeking clarification and modification of directions issued in the judgment and order dated 3-11-2017 in Orissa Lift Irrigation Corpn. Ltd. v. Rabi Sankar Patro, (2018) 1 SCC 468. The gist of the applications and the contentions advanced by the learned counsel were considered category-wise.

Category A concerned applicants who, holding diplomas in Engineering, had enrolled in 2005 in courses leading to award of B.Tech degree offered by deemed to be universities through distance learning mode, and on the basis of the degrees so awarded, underwent independent selection conducted by the Union Public Service Commission and entered certain services as direct recruits.

Category B concerned candidates who had completed B.Tech courses in Computer Science through distance education mode in 2004, with instructions imparted at ITM International and degrees awarded by Allahabad Agricultural Institute, Deemed to be University, and had thereafter advanced in career.

Category C concerned candidates who had acquired first degrees in Engineering from a regular and approved institution but had later acquired Masters degrees in Engineering from deemed to be universities through distance education mode.

Category D concerned applicants who were awarded diplomas in Engineering through distance education mode by the deemed to be universities concerned.

Category E concerned applicants enrolled in courses offered by Vinayaka Missions Research Foundation (VMRF) through distance education mode.

Categories F and G concerned applicants who had either completed postgraduate courses after being awarded Engineering degrees through distance education, or had acquired degrees in Mining Engineering through distance education mode and advanced in career in NMDC, a statutory corporation.

Category H (Writ Petition Civil No. 1233 of 2017) concerned applicants awarded degrees in Engineering through distance education mode by deemed to be universities, most of whom had joined private, corporate and government services.

Category I concerned IASE, Deemed to be University, seeking clarification that the judgment applied only to courses leading to degrees in Engineering and that diploma courses were not covered.

The Court's clarifications and directions were as follows:

First, the Court clarified that the controversy in the judgment pertained to validity of degrees in Engineering conferred by deemed to be universities through distance education mode, and the Court was not called upon to consider validity of diplomas conferred by such deemed to be universities. Accordingly, the prayer of diploma-holders was accepted and the validity of courses leading to diplomas was held not to be the subject-matter of the judgment.

Second, courses leading to award of degrees, whether graduate or postgraduate, were certainly the matter in issue. The submission of Mr Kapil Sibal, learned Senior Advocate, to the contrary was rejected.

Third, regarding VMRF, though its field of activity and excellence also included subjects in Engineering, the conferral of degrees in Engineering through distance education mode was never approved in principle by AICTE and the Study Centres were never inspected or approved. The submission of Mr Anupam Lal Das, learned Advocate, was accordingly rejected.

Fourth, regarding ITM International, since award of degrees in Engineering through distance education mode by deemed to be universities was not accepted by AICTE as a concept or principle, it was held immaterial whether the Study Centre in question was ITM International.

Fifth, while the Court held that the infirmity in the degrees was basic and fundamental and cannot be wished away, it found force in the submission that candidates may lose their jobs if the suspension of degrees and advantages were to apply immediately. Accordingly, as a one-time relaxation, candidates enrolled during the academic years 2001–2005 who exercised the option to appear at the test to be conducted by AICTE in May–June 2018 could retain their degrees and all advantages flowing therefrom till one month after the declaration of the result, or till 31-7-2018, whichever was earlier. If they passed in the first attempt, they would be entitled to retain all advantages. If they failed or chose not to appear, the degrees and all advantages would stand suspended and withdrawn, with no further chances or exceptions to be given. They would be entitled to appear on the second occasion in terms of the judgment, but the exception would not apply for such second attempt.

AICTE was directed to conduct the test in May–June 2018 and declare the result well in time. All other submissions were rejected. All applications, petitions and writ petitions were disposed of accordingly.