Case Title: PRANEETH K AND ORS. V. UNIVERSITY GRANTS COMMISSION (UGC) AND ORS.
The following guidelines were made by the Supreme Court in response to petitions contesting the University Grants Commission's (UGC) directives for holding final semester examinations:-
1. The petition to invalidate the UGC rules for holding the exams was denied by the bench.
2. The State Disaster Management Authority's instructions shall take precedence over UGC instructions when it comes to postponing exams in that specific State.
3. The State Disaster Management Authority's directive, however, to pass the pupils based on their prior performance is outside the purview of the Disaster Management Act.
4. As mandated by UGC, States/UTs cannot promote final-year students without an examination. States and Union Territories are free to request a deferral of the exams from the UGC in view of the COVID-19 pandemic crisis.
The verdict was reserved by a three-judge panel made up of Justices Ashok Bhushan, R Subhash Reddy, and MR Shah. The panel had carefully heard all the parties. The main contentions of the students were -
When the COVID-19 epidemic became severe, forcing kids to be physically present for the classes would have put their health in considerable danger, which affected their right to life.
Since many locations were confinement zones and local lockdown were common in many areas, the universal guidance provided by the UGC without consideration for local circumstances would have seriously disadvantage some pupils.
Classes had been disrupted by the epidemic and lockdown, and it was arbitrary and unjust to administer tests without holding the required number of classes.
Many students in their last semester had either aced job interviews or got admitted into better programmes. Therefore, the greatest course of action available to safeguard the students' future was to issue them degree diplomas as soon as possible based on prior performance.
The severe digital divide and the absence of universal internet access made the idea of online tests impractical as well.
There were other methods of appraisal than conducting examinations. From day one, UGC adheres to the idea of "constant evaluation" of the learner. Therefore, it was possible to give final degrees based on internal evaluations and performance from previous semesters.
According to the UGC, the directive was given with the student's best interests in mind. The opening of educational institutions for the purpose of administering tests had been granted an exemption, the Ministry of Home Affairs informed the Court.
The lawsuit also raised the question of a discrepancy between the UGC Act and the Disaster Management Act. This occurred when the State of Maharashtra followed the State Disaster Management Authority's directive to order the cancellation of the final term examinations. So, the question emerged whether the SDMA's or the UGC's instructions will take precedence in this situation.
The UGC argued that it continues to have the last say on matters pertaining to higher education and that the SDMA cannot intervene there. On the other hand, the State of Maharashtra argued that the State Disaster Management Authority possesses broad authority to make the necessary decisions to handle the situation in order to protect people's lives in light of the COVID-19 pandemic, which has been declared a "disaster" within the meaning of the DMA.
Whether state governments have autonomy in the topic was another significant question in the case. Exams for the last term were cancelled on instructions from the governments of the National Capital Territories of Delhi, West Bengal, Odisha, Maharashtra, etc. So, the issue was whether UGC could supersede the State Governments in that situation.
The State Governments contended that the UGC may only set standards for education and cannot give institutions orders that are mandatory. It was also contended that, in accordance with Section 12 of the UGC Act, the UGC can only establish rules after constraining universities. The States argued that the UGC made the judgement without their input or consideration of local circumstances.