|
|
|
|
|
| Tuesday, July 03, 2007
Law directing unaided colleges to surrender seats upheld
Court holds it to be in conformity with the constitutional
mandate
Chennai: The Madras High Court on Monday upheld the constitutional
validity of a State legislation and a consequent Government
Order directing the unaided professional colleges to surrender
a certain percentage of seats to the State quota and also to
follow centralised counselling for admission for management
quota seats.
Justice V. Dhanapalan, dismissing a batch of writ petitions
filed by various associations of self-financing professional
colleges, said the Tamil Nadu Admission in Professional Educational
Institutions Act 2006 had been given effect to “taking
note of the local needs and, specifically, larger interest and
welfare of the student community and to promote merit, achieve
excellence and curb malpractices.”
The petitions challenged three specific clauses of the Act relating
to the surrender of 65 per cent of the total seats to Government
by non-minority institutions and surrender of 50 per cent of
seats by minority institutions; admission of students for management
quota seats through the centralised counselling or single window
system (SWS); and admissions on the basis of marks obtained
in the qualifying examinations alone. Senior counsel for the
associations submitted that the conditions were illegal and
that they amounted to nationalisation of seats. They said the
seat-sharing agreement between the institutions and the Government
was relevant only for the academic year 2006-07. Advocate-General
R. Viduthalai, assisted by Special Government Pleader for Education
M. Sekar, said the petitioners did not protest when the Bill
was introduced in the Assembly and when it was given assent
by the President. Seat-sharing could not be reviewed every year
unless there was a material change warranting modification of
the terms of agreement.
Mr. Justice Dhanapalan said: “From a reading of the impugned
Sections and considering the whole context of the Act, I am
satisfied that the legislative intent has been in conformity
with the constitutional mandate and the object sought to be
achieved by the legislation.” The Supreme Court’s
view to bring out legislation in the matter had been now brought
out for the “good governance of the educational field
in total and also to achieve national wealth in the field of
education.”
Reiterating that he did not see any illegality or unconstitutionality
in the Sections 2(c)(iii), 4(1) and 5(4) of the Act, Mr. Justice
Dhanapalan said legislation must be allowed to stand as the
true expression of the national will, “unless it becomes
clear beyond reasonable doubt that the legislation in question
transgresses the limits laid down by the organic law of the
Constitution.”
Courtesy: The Hindu
|
| << Back |
|
|
