The Supreme Court today is continuing hearing in the matter related to the pleas challenging University Grants Commission's (UGC) revised guidelines of conducting final year university exams across the country. During Thursday's hearing, UGC remained adamant on its decision of not cancelling the final year exams, asking all universities of conducting final year exams by September end, saying July 6, 2020 revised guidelines offer sufficient flexibility and are intended to protect the academic future of students.

Supreme Court hearing :

. Justice Ashok Bhushan-led bench of the Supreme Court hearing a batch of pleas challenging the UGC Guidelines mandating completion of final year exams by universities before September 30.

. Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi submits for final year law student Yash Dubey. He said there are 16 lakh cases of COVID19 now. The response by UGC has been filed without any application of mind. Singhvi added that look at the earlier guidelines and look at the ones issued on July 6.

. Singhvi continued his argument saying, "the first guideline was 3 months ago by UGC on April 22.

. Supreme Court 3-judge judge bench takes time to assimilate all the rejoinders filed in the case. 

. SC passes over the case as rejoinders filed by petitioners are not in order.

. Advocate Alakh Alok Srivastava submits that 31 petitioners in the case are students.

. Singhvi submits that UGC guidelines were reversed in July.

. Justice Bhushan says UGC can always revisit guidelines.

. Singhvi terms 'revisiting guidelines' was arbitrary.

. Singhvi added some of the universities lack basic IT infrastructure to conduct these online exams. It is not feasible to adopt the online mode of exam uniformly.

.SC says guidelines provide both online and offline.

. Singhvi says now this is striking... the new guidelines was to make it more difficult for students amid COVID19.

. Singhvi continues his argument saying, "this optional exam is problematic. If someone cannot appear in the exam and given a later option it will create chaos!"

. Supreme Court says but it is for the benefit of the students. "Are decisions by the state disaster management committee on the record?"

. Singhvi replies, "I will place them on record."

. Singhvi adds, "Many universities have been converted into COVID-19 centers. This is there in Maharashtra and West Bengal. Bar Council too has cancelled the exams. The July 6 guidelines ignore the MHA guidelines too.

. Singhvi further mentions, "heavens will not fall if exams are cancelled.

. Supreme Court says the MHA guidelines were of July 20. How can July 6 guidelines take them into account? The purpose of that guideline by MHA did not relate to exams.

. Singhvi mentions, "Section 62 of NDMA states that state government can take decisions in this regard and section 72 gives an overriding effect to this.

. Supreme Court asks, "Who appears for the State of Maharashtra?

. The crucial hearing comes after the top court issued notice to and sought to know if health concerns raised by students apprehensive of appearing in the exams amid COVID19 is misplaced.

. The lead petition in the case was filed by Advocate Anubha Shrivastava Sahai. She is the President of India wide parents association and child rights activist. Sahai would be argued by Advocate Alakh Alok Srivastava.

. Senior Advocate Dr Abhishek Manu Singhvi will also represent final year law student Yash Dubey.

. Senior Advocate Shyam Divan will appear for Yuvasena chief Aditya Thackeray, Shiv Sena MLA from Worli in Maharashtra and son of Maharashtra Chief Minister Uddhav Thackeray.
No Comments For This Post, Be first to write a Comment.
Leave a Comment
Enter the code shown:

Can't read the image? click here to refresh

Todays Epaper

Latest Urdu News

Which political party will win the GHMC elections 2020?