‘Students can’t decide their own welfare’: SC on pleas opposing UGC exams
The Supreme Court on Tuesday reserved its verdict on a batch of petitions challenging the University Grants Commission (UGC)’s order to conduct final year exams by September 30. Students across India have opposed the UGC’s guidelines, questioning the logic of conducting the exams at a time when the pandemic situation has worsened across the country.
A three-judge bench headed by Justice Ashok Bhushan heard the arguments made on behalf of the petitioners. Senior Advocate Arvind Datar on behalf of the State of Maharashtra stated that the UGC can lay down standards but cannot compel colleges to hold exams. When Datar brought up the issue of welfare of students, Justice Bhushan said that students are not capable of deciding their welfare.
“Only the authorities can decide what is in their welfare. Students are not competent enough to decide,” Justice Bhushan said, according to LiveLaw.
Justice Bhushan says that the students cannot decide their welfare.
— Live Law (@LiveLawIndia) August 18, 2020
“Only the authorities can decide what is in their welfare. Students are not competent enough to decide.”#StudentsInSCForJustice #StudentsInSCAgainstUGC #student_lives_matter #31StudentsInSCAgainstUGC
On the concern of dilution of standards in the absence of exams, Advocate Datar reportedly questioned why other colleges cannot cancel final exams, when the reputed IITs have given degrees without holding exams. Datar and others also contested that students in their final semester have completed a major portion of their course load, and have been evaluated continuously from the first semester itself.
Arguing that the situation is especially worse in Maharashtra, Advocate Datar contested that different states cannot have the same deadline of September 30.
It was also pointed out that several educational institutions have been converted to quarantine centres or flood relief shelters.
Senior Advocate K V Vishwanathan who appeared for the Delhi Government, reportedly argued that the “the poor, the downtrodden, and those without any access to technology” would be the worst hit.
Advocate Alakh Alok Srivastava also raised the point that as per Section 14 of the UGC Act, universities that fail to comply with UGC Guidelines stand the risk of losing UGC grants.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta argued that the Standard Operating Procedure for holding exams includes thermal scanning, masks, social distancing in the interest of students’ health, and that the UGC’s directions were in the students’ interests.
According to LiveLaw, SG Mehta argued, “The students are 21-22 year olds. Can you really believe that they will not be going out ?”
The top court reserved its verdict and directed all parties to file their written submissions with three days, reported Times of India.
In the previous hearing on the matter on Friday, Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi had argued that the pandemic was an extraordinary situation, and highlighted the disparity among students from different classes. Senior Advocate Shyam Divan questioned the UGC’s order to conduct the exams at a time when the COVID-19 caseload is in lakhs when exams had been postponed in April when the infections were much lower.
Earlier on July 6, the UGC had ordered all universities and colleges to complete their final term examinations by September 30. Institutions were given the option of holding the exams through online, offline or hybrid mode, depending on the pandemic situation. The deadline was justified by stating that students must have a fair opportunity on a global level to pursue higher studies or start the jobs for which they’ve been recruited through placements.
The Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) had informed the SC on August 13 that it had decided to allow colleges to open to conduct final term examinations, thus supporting the UGC’s stand.