College mess: SC clears, only a little

Since 8216;8216;time is running out8217;8217; for admissions, the court said, the managements of these colleges have been given a free hand for the current academic year to admit any candidate on their 50 per cent quota.

For subsequent years, the management quota will again vary from state to state but all admissions to that quota will be on the basis of a common entrance test CET held by an association of private professional colleges in each state. Alternatively, the management may opt to fill its quota through the CET conducted by the state government.

A five-judge bench set up to clarify a judgment delivered last October by a 11-judge bench did not however make any attempt to settle the issue that has proved most contentious around the country: to what extent is the management entitled to fill its seats? The five-judge bench headed by Chief Justice of India V N Khare left this vital issue unresolved as it reaffirmed the rather uncertain formulation of the 11-bench judgment that each state will determine the management quota on the basis of 8216;8216;local needs.8217;8217;

Therefore, today8217;s judgment running into 150 pages will have little effect on the petitions pending in the Supreme Court and high courts challenging the management quotas fixed by state governments.

Confronted with a vexatious litigation, Khare8217;s bench took recourse to the time-tested method of setting up committees. In fact, it ordered the appointment of about 60 committees across the country: two for each state.

One committee will decide whether the fee proposed by each institution is 8216;8216;justified8217;8217; and does not amount to 8216;8216;profiteering or capitation fee.8217;8217; The other committee will 8216;8216;ensure that the tests conducted by the association of colleges is fair and transparent.8217;8217;

The admissions to private colleges from next year onwards are meant to take place under the supervision of these committees, which will be headed by retired high court judges. The committees will be vested with far reaching powers. The exam committee, for instance, will be empowered to see in advance the question papers for the entrance examination set by the association of private colleges.

Though the 11-judge verdict has been hailed as a decision that liberalised higher education, the five-judge bench ruled today that 8216;8216;imparting of education is essentially charitable in nature.8217;8217;

In a radical twist to the case concerning private colleges, Khare8217;s bench said 8216;8216;the surplus/profit that can be generated must be only for the benefit/use of that educational institution. Profits/surplus cannot be diverted for any other purpose and cannot be used for personal gain or for any other business or enterprise.8217;8217;

In keeping with its anxiety to check profiteering in education, the court directed the states to frame regulations under which a college found to be charging capitation fee in any form can be 8216;8216;appropriately penalised and also face the prospect of losiing its recognition/affiliation.8217;8217;

One important issue that has been clarified by today8217;s judgment is regarding the status of minority educational institutions vis a vis their non minority counterparts. The bench ruled that non-minority educational institutions do not have the protection of Article 30 which gives minorities a fundamental right to establish and administer educational institutions of their choice.

Stating that Article 30 confers 8216;8216;certain advantages8217;8217; on minorities, the court said though the government may, for instance, have a right to take over the management of a non-minority educational institution, the management of a minority educational institution cannot be taken over because of the protection given under Article 30.