The phrase “all other relevant factors” under Sub-section (2)(d) allows the UGC to include almost any criteria in its fee regulations, which can lead to regulatory creep where the Commission starts dictating internal university budget allocations under the guise of fee regulation.
Clause (b) examines the types of activities or professions graduates will engage in, like medicine, engineering, or teaching, where public safety or quality matters.
This fragmented funding model leads to institutional stagnation, where universities wait years for grants while inflation erodes the value of the allocated funds.
The UGC can advise universities under Section 12(j) to take necessary steps for improving university education and recommend actions for implementing such advice.
The words “all such steps” are of wide import. The steps referred to in Section 12 may include issuance of guidelines, directions, circulars etc. Hence the Guidelines issued in exercise of statutory powers, thus, cannot be said to be non-statutory.
The Central Information Commission (CIC) has frequently pulled up statutory bodies for not pro-actively disclosing authenticated orders on their websites, arguing that Section 11 authentication should be the start of the communication process, not the end.
The UGC’s lack of professional, independent administrative staff, in influence of the slow-moving Government Rule machinery has hindered its ability to regulate a 21st-century education market.
An associated person might be a professor from a private university giving advice on regulations that affect their own institution.
But the Act is silent on vacancy of Chairman or Vice-Chairman of the Commission. In absence of these two leadership posts who will be authorized to sign on behalf of them?
The Court suggested that transaction of business cannot be used to pass exclusionary definitions, such as the restrictive definition of caste discrimination, without transparent and inclusive deliberation as intended by the spirit of the Act.
