Allow Cookies!
By using our website, you agree to the use of cookies
While considering an appeal filrd against a High Court order by the Institution of Mechanical Engineers (India) (registered under the Societies Registration Act 1860, the Supreme Court observed that: any certficate issued by an institution/authority/person not being specified in Section 22(1) of the University Grants Commissions Act, 1956 will not be equivalent to a 'degree'.
The appealed order dismissed a petition filed by the aforementioned institution that contained the claim that the qualification acquired after appearing for the biannual examinations conducted by the Institution of Mechanical Engineers (India), Mumbai would be equivalent to a degree. On successfully completing the biannual examinatons the persons were awarded with a certificate holding title "Associate Member of Institution of Engineers".
The Supreme Court bench (comprising J. UU Lalit and J. Deepak Gupta while placing emphasis that the said Society is not covered under the ambit of Section 22(1) of the UGC Act held:
"In terms of Section 22(1) of the UGC Act, right to confer degrees can be exercised only by a University established or incorporated by or under a Central Act, a Provincial Act or a State Act or by an institution deemed to be a University under Section 3 of the UGC Act or by an institution specially empowered by an Act of Parliament to confer or grant degrees. The idea appearing in Sub-Section (1) of said Section 22 is made emphatically clear by Sub-Section (2) which stipulates: "Save as provided in sub-section (1), no person or authority shall confer, or grant, or hold himself or itself out as entitled to confer or grant, any degree". The intent of the Parliament is clear that it is only that body which is referred to in sub-Section (1) of Section 22, that is competent to confer or grant degrees. The appellant does not fall under any of these categories enumerated in Section 22(1) of the UGC Act.
If a degree can be awarded only by those institutions which satisfy the description given in sub-Section (1) of Section 22 of the UGC Act, the mandate of a Parliamentary legislation cannot be circumvented or nullified by awarding equivalence to a Certificate issued and awarded by the appellant. What is the value of that certificate will be considered by each employer as and when the occasion arises. The appellant would certainly be entitled to award Certificate of Membership to its Members. What weightage the Certificates must have is for the individual employers to consider in a given case.
The Court concluded that while such employers may consider the "worth" of such certificate, and establish "capabilities" of the holder of such certificates but it would be faulty to assume that such certificates ar equivalent to a certificate. The bench further clarified that the right to confer a degree is exercisable only by a University that is established under Central/Provincial/State Act or an instituion that is "deemed to be a university" u/s 3 of the UGC Act, or by an institution that is empowered to grant degrees by an Act of Parliament.
86540
103860
630
114
59824