Saturday, 21 September 2013

SUPREME COURT DECISION ON JUNE 2012 CRITERIA

नेट के लिए योग्यता तय करने को यूजीसी स्वतंत्र


सुप्रीम कोर्ट ने बांबे और केरल हाई कोर्ट के फैसले को पलटा कहा, वैधानिक प्रावधानों के उल्लंघन पर ही करेंगे हस्तक्षेप


नई दिल्ली, प्रेट्र: राष्ट्रीय पात्रता परीक्षा (नेट) पास करने के लिए विश्वविद्यालय अनुदान आयोग (यूजीसी) द्वारा योग्यता तय करने की नीति को सही ठहराते हुए सुप्रीम कोर्ट ने कहा कि यूजीसी द्वारा किए गए बदलाव मनमाने और अवैध नहीं हैं। 1जस्टिस केएस राधाकृष्णन की अध्यक्षता वाली पीठ ने गुरुवार को अपने फैसले में कहा कि सुप्रीम कोर्ट शिक्षा मामलों में तब तक हस्तक्षेप नहीं करेगा जब तक वह मामला वैधानिक प्रावधानों, विनियमों या अधिसूचना के स्पष्ट उल्लंघन से न जुड़ा हो। पीठ ने कहा, ‘एक विशेषज्ञ निकाय के तौर पर यूजीसी (जो वह बेहतर समङो) विश्वविद्यालयों में अध्यापन, परीक्षा और रिसर्च से संबंधित मानक तय कर सकता है।’ 1यूजीसी ने बांबे हाई कोर्ट के उस फैसले को चुनौती दी थी जिसमें उसके द्वारा नेट उत्तीर्ण करने के लिए निर्धारित न्यूनतम योग्यता मानदंड को दरकिनार कर दिया गया था। सुप्रीम कोर्ट ने हाई कोर्ट के फैसले को पलटते हुए यह व्यवस्था दी है। 1दरअसल, मार्च 2012 में यूजीसी ने नेट परीक्षा के लिए अधिसूचना जारी की थी। इसके तहत सामान्य वर्ग के लिए सभी तीनों विषयों में न्यूनतम 40, 40 और 50 फीसद अंक प्राप्त करना अनिवार्य था। अन्य पिछड़ा वर्ग और अनुसूचित जाति-जनजाति के लिए क्रमश: पांच और दस फीसद की छूट दी गई थी। परीक्षा के बाद जून, 2012 को यूजीसी ने तीनों विषय में सामान्य वर्ग के लिए कुल 65, ओबीसी के लिए 60 और एससी/एसटी के लिए 55 फीसद अंक प्राप्त करना निर्धारित कर दिया। अभ्यर्थियों ने यूजीसी के इस निर्णय को हाई कोर्ट में चुनौती दी। केरल और बांबे हाई कोर्ट ने यूजीसी के फैसले को रद कर दिया था।

 The Supreme Court Thursday upheld the University Grant Commission's policy for fixing eligibility criteria for candidates to qualify the National Eligibility Test (NET), saying it is not "arbitrary and illegal". A bench, headed by Justice K S Radhakrishnan, said courts shall not interfere in matters of education unless there is a violation of statutory provisions and it is open to the UGC to lay down any qualifying criteria. "We are of the view that in academic matters unless there is a clear violation of statutory provisions, regulations or the notification issued, the courts shall keep their hands off since those issues fall within the domain of the experts. A bench, headed by Justice K S Radhakrishnan, said courts shall not interfere in matters of education unless there is a violation of statutory provisions. "UGC, as an expert body, has been entrusted with the duty to take steps as it may think fit for the determination and maintenance of standards of teaching, examination and research in the University. For attaining the said standards, it is open to the UGC to lay down any qualifying criteria which has a rational nexus to the object to be achieved," the bench said. The bench was hearing the UGC's plea challenging the Bombay High Court's order setting aside the eligibility criteria fixed by the UGC for the NET June 2012 exam for Junior Research Fellowship and Lecturership. "The UGC has only implemented the opinion of experts by laying down the qualifying criteria which cannot be considered as arbitrary, illegal or discriminatory or violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India," the bench said while allowing the Commission's appeal. In March 2012, the UGC had called for applications for NET exam and in its notification it had prescribed the minimum marks for general category as 40 per cent, 40 per cent and 50 per cent in papers 1, 2 and 3 respectively. OBC and SC/ST candidates were given a relaxation of five per cent and 10 per cent respectively. After the test in June 2012, the UGC had added a clause prescribing 65 per cent aggregate marks in all three subjects for general candidates, 60 per cent for OBC and 55 per cent for SC/ST as final qualifying criteria. The final qualifying criteria was challenged by candidates before the Kerala High Court as well as the Bombay High Court. The UGC's final criteria was set aside by a single-judge bench of the Kerala High Court and a division bench of the Bombay High Court. The apex court, while upholding the UGC's decision, said "prescribing the (final) qualifying criteria, in our view, does not amount to a change in the rule of the game as it was already pre-meditated in the notification. We are not inclined to say that the UGC has acted arbitrarily or whimsically against the candidates." The apex court said the UGC, in exercise of its statutory powers and the criteria in the notification for NET 2012, had set up a Moderation Committee consisting of experts for finalising the qualifying criteria and it acted on the basis of the expert panel's recommendations. "The UGC has only implemented the opinion of experts by laying down the qualifying criteria which cannot be considered as arbitrary, illegal or discriminatory or violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India," the bench said. The court held the UGC's power to prescribe, as it thinks fit, the qualifying criteria for maintaining the standards of teaching, exams, etc "cannot be disputed". The apex court noted that the candidates who took the NET 2012 were not misled in any manner and clarified the phrase "clearing the NET" means clearing the final results and not just passing the three papers of the examination.

No comments:

Post a Comment