Puducherry: The University Grants Commission (UGC), as well as, the Human Resource Development (HRD) Ministry on Thursday, received directions from the Madras High Court to form a committee as ordered by the court on 16th June 2017, to fix a fee structure for Puducherry’s deemed to be universities for medical course admissions.
The court of the First Division Bench of Chief Justice Indira Banerjee and Justice Abdul Quddhose were responding to a public interest litigation petition filed by advocate V.B.R. Menon. The petition accused the deemed universities of charging between Rs40 lakh and Rs 50 lakh a student even from those who had been selected in the State quota through common counselling and were meant to pay Rs. 5.5 lakh.
The court on discovering that the committee was yet to be formed despite 10 months having elapsed since the order was issued, decided to give three weeks time for its constitution. It further directed that the committee’s recommendations submitted within 4 months from the day of constitution After giving all the stakeholders, including deemed universities the opportunity to express their views.
The petitioner’s plea that a similar direction is given for self-financing colleges by the court, was turned down with a request that a separate writ is filed for it.
On the issue of one more PIL filed by an advocate for the dismissal of 35 students admitted illegally, the judges abstained from passing any order.The judges pointed at the students having been discharged by the Medical Council of India and then having filed individual writ petitions in the High Court and obtained interim orders from a single judge
The Division Bench Clarified the question about the illegality of their admissions could only be decided through the writs filed by them.
A third PIL petition filed by Mr Menon on seeking a direction regarding the constitution of an independent body with statutory powers for addressing medical admissions grievances in Puducherry was disposed of by a Bench led by the Chief Justice. The observation made in this case by the bench was that no such direction could be issued since it would amount to usurping of powers of the legislature by the judiciary reports the Hindu.
The Bench, however, gave freedom to the petitioner to make representations to the concerned legislators.