IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA ORIGINAL CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (C) NO. \S4 OF 2018 INTHE MATTER OF; . H AFFILIATED ENGINEERING COLLEGES «PETITIONERS a TEACHERS ASSOCIATION & ORS. VERSUS i UNION OF INDIA & ANR. RESPONDENTS PAPER-BOOK (FOR INDEX, KINDLY SEE INSIDE) VOLUME-I (Pages | to 59) 4wed INDEX OF RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS " SL.NO. DATE OF RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PAGE NO. 1, : PMP NDA nr B® ww SINDEX Education Act, 1987 SL Particulars of Document Part 1 Part2 | Remarks No. (Contents | (Contents ofPaper | offile Court Fee — Rs.1550/- Book) | alone) o a Gi @). @ 1. O/Ron Limitation A 2, Listing Proforma Al - Ad 3, __| Cover page of Paper Book AS 4. Index of Record of Proceedings aa 3. Limitation Report prepared by AS the Registry 6 | Defect List A6 7, _ Note Sheets NS1 To 8. Synopsis List of Dates B-G 9. [Writ Petition along with Supporting Affidavit 1-38 10. | Appendix-A: All India Council for Technical | 39-59Ay PROFORMA FOR FIRST LISTING section PEL ‘The case pertains to (Please tick/check the correct box): CO Centrai Act: (Tite) AU tmdta Coueneil dey Technica hig Beeston Ack, Section : 78s Central Rule : (Title) a A: RuleNo(s)s_ NA State Act:(Titey_— NAR Section: NA ‘ State Rule : (Title) Tina IMMA MIMI Rule No(s) : N-AL oogagag 0c aa Impugned Interim Order : (Date)__N+ A+ © impugned Final Order/Decree : (Date)_ N'A © High Court ; (Name) NA: oe CO Names of Judges: wA: a Tibet (Name)__ Nf 1. Nature of matter: Evil Oi criminat : 2, (= PetiichappellanNo.t :_ AEE Létzel Exain cing, Clap 7 Backes Frack then (b) e-mail ID; it. (©) Mobile phone number: _+91 944 OF 41623 3. (a) Respondent No. 1:__Unien sf Tndig (b) e-mail ID: NvA’ (©) Mobile phone number;___N “A2/2 a . (a) Main category classification: © 8 Af ‘2 (b)Sub classification: 212 Notto be listed before: = SN-As Similar/Pending mater;_N/ a ~ . Criminal Matters: (a) Whether accused/convict has surrendered: [J Yes No (b) FIR No. SLA. a Date: Ne A. (€) Police Station: Ne AL + -@Sentence Awarded:__ N+ _ AV (©) Sentence Undeone:___ N- A * 7 N+ A (b) Date of Section 6 notification: __.N« A (©) Date of Section 17 notification. N- AY 9. Tax Matters: State the tax eftecs__N' 8. Land Acquisition Matters: (@) Date of Section 4 notificat 10. Special Category (first petitioner/appellant only): W\+/¥?- CiSenior citizen > 65 years CISC/ST C) Woman/child [1 Disabled C) Legal Aid case (In custody 11. Vehicle Number (in case of Motor Accident Claini matters): 12, Decided cases with citation: NA 6 Date: 16-02: 2018 AOR for petitioner(sVappellant(s) (Wamey_]S MITRA Registration No,_41852$B. SYNOPSIS ‘The present petition is being filed as public interest litigation under Article 32 of the Constitution of India, and the same aims 10 bring forth the arbitrary and improper Approval Process Handbook (hereinafter referred to as ‘handbook’) of the year 2018-2019 issued by All India Council for Technical Education, Respondent No. 2 on 15.12.2017-The present petition is being filed specifically for an ad- interim relief related-to withdrawthe newly imposed facuity-student ratio aimed at reduction in staff numbers in higher education courses governed by the AICTE. The ratio, which was 1:15 earlier in the handbook of the yéar 2017-2018, has been decreased to 1:20 for the year 2018-2019,thereby violating the fundamental rights of faculty/members working in various private engineering colleges across the nation. The present petition is being filed against the change in faculty staff ratio from 1:15 to 1:20, which can create large- scale unemployment, hamper the future of students and jeopardize the educational infrastructure of the nation. The improper normsof reducing faculty strength laid down in the handbook of the year 2018- 2019 released by Respondent No. 2 are hampering the technical education system of India thereby having a direct impact on the development of the country. The present Petition is being filed in the interest of protecting the fundamental right of more than 6 lakh faculty members working in private engineering colleges through out the country, It is submittedeq that due to newly implemented faculty student ratio, not only numerous number of professors are going to lose their employment but also the teachers pursuing their career will be burdened with extra work thereby affecting the future of students enrolled in private engineering colleges. It is submitted that teachers and professors are the engine of educational institutions and burdening them with more students will directly affect the quality of the education thereby hampering the growth of our nation, It is respectfully submitted that the increment in the faculty staff ratio will not only burden the current schedule of teachers but also hamper the focus of professors towards their students. The new faculty student ratiois violating the fundamental rights granted under Article 19(1)(g) and Article 21 of the Constitution of India of the faculty/staff of such private engineering colleges. The students in the private engineering colleges are directly responsible for the technological and scientific growth of our nation, The education system directly affects the development of the coutltry and therefore for any nation to rise, it is extremely een that the interests of the students of the private institutions are protected. The new faculty student ratio are violating the fundamental rights granted under Article 19(1)(g) and Article 21 of the Constitution of India of the students of such private engineering colleges. Hence the present petition.IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA ORIGINAL CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION (UNDER ARTICLE 32 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA) WITH PRAYER FOR INTERIM RELIEF PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION p PETITY ML Ci INTHE MATTER OF:- ee AFFILIATED ENGINEERING -.. PETITIONERS COLLEGES . TEACHERS ASSOCIATION & ORS, Versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. "RESPONDENTS LIST OF DATES SL. J . DATE PARTICULARS NO, 1 (1987 All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) z Act, 1987 was published by Ministry of law and Justice in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part II, Section-1 2 (04.04.2017 The All India Federation of Self Financing Technical Institutions (AIFSETI), having membersE leadership of Dr. AnshuKataria, President and Sri. S.Munirathinam, Chief Patron met AICTE Chairman submitted a memorandum to consider the request fix the faculty ratio as 1:28. The same was reported vide an article in a newspaper “Punjab Express? 28.08.2017 The All India Federation of Self Financing Technical Institutions (AIFSFTD, having members of around 20 different State Associations, under the leadership of Dr. AnshuKataria, President and Sri R. S.Munirathinam, Chief Patron met AICTE Chairman submitted a memorandum to consider the request fix the faculty ratio as 1:25, The same was reported vide an article in a newspaper “Punjab Express’ : 26.11.2017 ‘The Petitioner No. 3 filed an RTI requesting for the date of publishing the Handbook for 2018-2019. 30.11.2017 The Petitioner No. 1 had sent a representationto the Respondent No. 2 requesting the latter to maintain the faculty student ratio to 1:15 and not amend it to 1:20 in the Engineering colleges in India from the academic year 2018-2019ce 15.12.2017 The Approval Process Handbook 2018-19 was released by Respondent No. 2 16.12.2017 The Petitioner No. 3 received a reply to the RTI dated 26.11.2017 stating that the said handbook is, available on website of Respondent No. 2. 16.12.2017 An online petition to the Hon'ble Prime Minister was fled by Petitioner No. 3 seeking support from citizens of India against the irrational faculty student ratio notified in the Handbook 2018-2019 by the Respondent No.2 21.12.2017 ‘The founder of the Petitioner No. 3 had also reported the consequences and effects of the amendment of the faculty student ratio in an interview to a leading newspaper ‘The New Indian Express’ 27.12.2017 Petitioner No. 1 submitted a detailed representation to the Respondent No.2 personally (by hand) in presence of all other officials and representatives of managements of private institutions 11. 06.01.2018 The Respondent No. 1 stated “Aadhar number has helped identify 80000 ghosts teachers in various colleges and institutions” and the same has been widely reported in a recent article in a leadingnewspaper “The Times of India” 16-02-2018: Hence the present Writ Petition is filed.» IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA | ORIGINAL CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION (UNDER ARTICLE 32 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA) ‘WITH PRAYER FOR INTERIM RELIEF PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION WRIT PETITION CIVIL ¢ ..) NO. OF 2018 IN THE MATTER OF:- AFFILIATED ENGINEERING + "7" COLLEGES TEACHERS ASSOCIATION THROUGH DR. NSSREDDY Flat No. 107, Bhavani Residency, Lakshmi Narsimha Swami Colony, : HyderShakote, Telengana: 500091 ... PETITIONER NO. 1 a Telengana Technical Institution Employees Association Through its authorized signatory Mr. V Balakrishna Reddy 3.35 Chennur, Gopalpet , Mahabub Nagar : ‘ Andra Pradesh - 509206 --PETITIONER NO. 2 e 2° Private Educational Institutions i Employees Association Through its authorized signatory Mr. M. Kumaresan S/o Sh. Muruganantham 2/16-B, Annai Illam, II Extension, Ezhil Nagar, «PETITIONER NO. 3 Trichy, Tamilnadu — 620014 Versus . The Union of India Ministry of Human Resource DevelopmentDi Through its Director C-127, Shastri Bhawan - New Delhi- 110001 ~»RESPONDENT NO. | v All India Council for Technical Education Through its Chairman 7th Floor, Chanderlok Building Janpath, New Delhi - 110001 ..RESPONDENT NO, 2 WRIT PETITION BY AND ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER UNDER ARTICLE 32 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA SEEKING ISSUANCE OF A WRIT OF MANDAMUS OR ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE WRIT OR ORDER OR eee IN THE NATURE THEREOF: - To, ‘The Hon'ble Chief Justice of India and His Lordship's Companion Justices of The Supreme Court of India MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH: 1, That the present petition is being filed by associations of teachers. formed for the sole purpose of protecting the rights of the professors and teachers working in various private engineering colleges under Respondent No. 1 and Respondent No. 2 across the nation. The Petitioner No. 1, acting through its authorized signatory Dr. N, Siva Sanakara Reddy S/o N. Venkata Reddy, is a registered association named as Affiliated Engineering Colleges Teachers Association (Reg: 255/2015), registered in the state of Telengana having its Registered Office at Flat No. 107,2 Bhavani Residency, Lakshmi Narasimha Swami Colony, Hydershakote, Telengana- 500091, Dr. N. Siva Sanakara Reddy S/o N. Venkata Reddy R/o Flat No. 107, Bhavani Residency, Lakshmi Narasimha Swami Colony Hydershakote, Telengana- 500091 is the General Secretary of the Petitioner No. 1 and has been authorized to act on behalf of the Petitioner No. 1. The email ID of the Authorized Secretary of the Petitioner No. 1 is nssreddy69. eam: 1ail.com . The contact no. of the Petitioner No. 1 is Ph. No. +91 9440741623. The national unique identification number.of the Petitioner No. 1 is Aadhaar No, 561107907417. The Pan No. of the Petitioner No.1 is CUPS9088P. The Petitioner No. 1 is an Associate Professor, having an annual income of Rs, 15,00,000/+ (Rs. Fifteen Lakhs only) in the financial year 2017-2018, It is stated that the Petitioner No. 1 is a citizen of India and a respectable member of the society. The true typed copy of the Authorization Letter dated 29.01.2018 authorizing Dr. N. Siva Sanakara Reddy to act on behalf of the Petitioner No. 1 is herewith annexed as ANNEXURE- P1. (Page No. QF = 31s) That the Petitioner No. 2, acting through its Authorized Signatory, Mr. V, Balakrishna Reddy S/o V. Chandra Reddy, is a registered association named as Telengana Technical Institufion Employees Association (Reg: 1113/2010), registered in the state of Telengana having its Registered Office at Plot No. 204, Intech@ 4 Residency, Opp Sant Narkarji Bhavan, Kaitharabad, Hyderabad 500004, V. Balakrishna Reddy S/o V. Chandra Reddy R/o 3-35 Chennur, Gopalpet, Mahbub Nagar, Andhra Pradesh- 509206 is the President of the Petitioner No. 2 and has been authorized to act on behalf of the Petitioner No, 2. The email ID of Petitioner No. 2 is vbkreddy!2@gmail.com. The contact no. of ,the Petitioner No. 2 is +91 9133563396. The national unique identification number of the Petitioner No. 2 is Aadhaar No,- 737261119830, The Pan No. of the Petitioner No. 2 is A9ZPB1708P. The Petitioner No. 2 is working as professor, having an annual income of Rs. 9,00,000/- (Rs. Nine Lakhs only) in the financial year 2017-2018. It is stated that the Petitioner No. 2 is a citizen of India and a respectable member of the society. The true typed copy of the authorized letter dated 30.01.2018 authorizing Mr, V. Balakrishna Reddy to act on behalf of the Petitioner No. 2 is herewith annexed as ANNEXURE-P2, (Page NoWA- 38) ‘That the Petitioner No. 3, acting through its authorized signatory Mr. M. Kumaresan S/o Murugantham; is a registered association named as Private Educational Institutions Employees Association (Reg: 127/2017), registered in the state of Tamil Nadu having its Registered Office at 2/16-B, Annai Ilam, I Extension, Ezhil Nagar, Trichy, Tamil Nadu - 620014. M. Kumaresan S/o Marugantham R/o SA3/S10, Saraswathi Apartment, ThyagiSs Shanmuga Nagar, Singanullur, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadw- 641005 is the Advisor of the Petitioner No. 3 and has been authorized to act on behalf of the Petitioner No. 3. The email ID of Petitioner No. 3 is kumaresam@yzhoo.com. The contact no, of the © Petitioner No. 3 is +91 9894872260. The national unique identification number of the Petitioner No, 3 is Aadhaar No. 2107 5§13 2804. The Pan No. of the Petitioner No. 3 is AIRPK6953C. The Petitioner No. 3 is a social worker, having nil annval income in the financial year 2017-2018, It is stated that the Petitioner No. 3° is a citizen of India and a respectable member of the society. The true typed copy of the authorized letter dated 01.02.2018 authorizing Mr. M. Kuntaresan to act on behalf of the Petitioner No. 3 is herewith annexed as ANNEXURE-P3. (Page No. 319-329) That the Petitioner No. 1 has approached .all concemed authorities with the issues raised in this Petition and the details of the same have been given in ANNEXURE- P10 to ANNEXURE: P13. It js stated that no reply has been received from the said authorities to the queries and grievances addressed to them and hence the Petitioners, left with no other option, have approached the Hon’ble Supreme Court under Article 32 of the Constitution of India. ‘That the Respondent No. 1 is the Secretary of the Ministry of£ Human Resource Development having its office at 127-C, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi- 110001 and is responsible for the development of the technical education that includes upder graduate and post graduate education throughout the.country. That the Respondent No. 2 is the All India Council for Technical Education (hereinafter referred to as “AICTE”) having its office at 7th Floor, Chanderlok Building, Janpath, New Delhi — 110001 ‘The Respondent No. 2 is the statutory authority for promotion of quality in technical education, planning & coordinating development of technical education system, and regulations & maintenance of norms and standards, The purview of Respondent No. 2 covers programs of technical education including training and research in Engineering, Technology, Architecture, Town Planning, Management, Pharmacy, Applied Arts and Crafts, Hotel Management and Catering Technology etc. at different levels. ‘That the present petition is being filed as public interest litigation under Article 32 of the Constitution of India, and the same aims to bring forth the arbitrary and improper provisions of the Approval Process Handbook (hereinafter refered to as “Handbook’) dated 15.12.2017 for the year 2018-2019 issued by Respondent No. 2. The said handbook is a jegal document as per the All India Technical Education Act, 1987 notified by Section4 (4.11) of Gazette Policy Regulation No, F.No: AB/AICTE/ REGI2016 of AICTE dated November 30, 2016 Notified on November 30, 2016 in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part- TI, Section-4 and amended on December 5, 2017 and is issued by the Respondent No. 2 each year for the succeeding year. It is stated that the said Handbook has guidelines for technical institutes across the nation regarding norms and standards, which are to be followed while grant and renewal of affiliations to private technical institutes by Universities. That the norms and standards issued in the Handbook released by Respondent No. 2 for the succeeding year contains requirements and standards, which are to be fulfilled and followed by the private technical institutes for taking or renewal of the affiliations by various other technical universities. The present Petition is being filed praying for an ad-interim relief for the withdrawal of the newly imposed faculty-student ratio, aimed at reduction in staff numbers in higher education courses governed by the, AICTE. The faculty-student ratio, which was 1:15 earlier as per the Handbook for the year 2017-2018, has been decreased to 1:20 for the year 2018-2019, thereby violating the fundamental rights of faculty/members working in various private engineering colleges across the nation. The present Petition is being filed against this arbitrary change in the faculty - student ratio from 1:15 to 1:20, which is bound to create large-scale unemployment,10. 8 hamper the future of students and jeopardize the educational infrastructure of the nation, A true typed copy of the relevant portion of the Handbook for the year 2018-2019 is annexed herewith as ANNEXURE-P4, (Page No:32/-3% The true typed copy of the relevant portion of the handbook for the year 2017-18 is annexed herewith and marked as ANNEXURE-PS (Page No.- 2 That the present Petition is being filed in the interest of protecting the fundamental rights of more than 6 lakh faculty members working in private engineering colleges throughout the country. The present Petition is also being filed against the improper norms of reducing faculty strength as laid down in the Handbook for the year 2018-2019 released by Respondent No. 2, which is directly hampering the technical education of the nation by ‘unnecessarily over-burdening the staff. It.is stated that Respondent No, 2 has released the Handbook for the year 2018- 2019 on 15.12.2017 in which the faculty - student ratio of 1:15 for Engineering & Technology and other programs ‘such as MBA, MCA, Diploma, HMCT, M-Pharm has been irrationally decreased to 1:20, thereby directly hampering the education system of our nation, ‘That it is stated that the decrement in staff - student ratio by the Respondent No. 2 is increasing the burden on the professors and4 is therefore violating the fundamental rights of students, teachers and professors granted under the Constitution of India. It is further stated that not only a number of professors are going to lose their employment owing to this irfational and unjustified actions of the Respondent No. 2 but also the teachers continuing in the said field will be burdened with extra work, thereby affecting the quality of the education imparted and hamper the future of the students enrolled in private engineering colleges. It is submitted that a teacher is an engine of the educational institution and bears the most important role in shaping a student’s career, The same has been observed by the Apex Court in St. John's Teacher Training Institute v. State of Tamil Nadu (AIR 1994 SC 43) wherein it was held that: "The teacher alone could bring out the skills and intellectual capabilities of students. He is the ‘engine! of the educational system. He is a principal instrument in awakening the child to cultural values. He needs to be endowed and energized with needed potential to deliver enlightened service expected of him.” It is submitted that teachers and professors are the heart and soul “of educational institutions and burdening them with more students will directly affect the quality of the edtication imparted to the students, thereby hampering the growth of our nation. It is respectfully sibmitted that when teachers are burdened with more duty, they cannot be.expected to give adequate attention to their students, and such decrement in the faculty student ratio -fo will not only burden the current schedule of teachers but also hamper the focus of professors towards their students. It is pertinent to mention here that the morale of the staff in private colleges is severely affected by the new faculty - student ratio as the increase in burden is not compensated with in terms of better incentives or a hike in salary. The present scenario of large number of unemployable students coming out of the private colleges is a direct result of unmotivated professors who are burdened with work by their management in teturn for their poor wages/salary. ‘That it is submitted that the students in the private engineering colleges are directly responsible for the technological and scientific growth of our nation. The education system directly affects the development of the country and therefore for any nation to rise, it is extremely important that the interests of the professors of the education institutioris are protected, It is stated that burdening professors with more students will not only hamper the development of our nation but also affect the shriduli aid Poser projects of the students, The professors, also acting as mentors and inspiration for the students, will not be able to give adequate time and attention to their students, further reducing the quality of their practical learning, ‘That 1:20 faculty student ratio in the Handbook for 2018-2019MN will severely affect the quality of edubation imparted to the students and hamper the development of the nation. It is stated that all the top 100 universities with the best student-staff ratio are from developed countries and all of them are within the 600 best universities in the World, as per the World University Ranking 2016, As a matter of fact, none of these universities has more than nine students for every staff member. The following table below depicts the faculty student ratio which is currently being followed in the top 10 universities of the world: - SNo. | University Faculty to Studert Ratio T. _ | Massachusetts Insitute of Technology, US [1:87 7, | Stanford University, US r7s 3, | University of Cambridge, UK Tit 4, _ | Naiyang Technical University, Singapore [1716.3 5. ETH Zurich, Swiss Federal Institate of | T2146 Technology, Switzerland ©, 7 Imperial College London, UK Tint 7, | National University of Singapore, T165 Singapore 8. | University of California, Berkeley, US [1.138 9, University of Oxford, UK 1:10.5 10. | Tsinginia University, China 1136 ‘The data above clearly shows the faculty — student ratio, which is being followed by the Top 10 universities, is not even close to the recently notified ratio of 1:20, which leaves us with no doubt13. We that the decrement in the faculty student ratio will severely affect the development of our country, It is stated that as per National Board of Accreditation (NBA), the desired faculty student ratio is 1:15. The fate of the development of our nation is in the hands of. the teachers and professors and therefore it is respectfully submitted that the faculty student ratio of 1:15 mentioned in the Handbook for 2017-2018 should be followed and continued for the years to come It is submitted that the decrement in the faculty student ratio will also massively affect the employment of staff in educational institutions. It is stated that after the execution of the new faculty student ratio, a number of teachers are going to lose their jobs. Further, the professors and teachers are going to come directly under the thumb of the management of private educational institutions and shall be intimidated to work for lesser salary by ee eee draconian ratio. The table below is tentative number of professors who shall get affected and lose their jobs: - 2017-2018 Academic year Courses Number of Number of Faculties Institutions Faculties in losing job job UG 3224 1406927 101731 Engineering &\3 ‘Technology PG Engineering 2136 40860 30645 & Technology Diploma 35% 133914 728782 MBA 3264 55876 13969, MCA 1138 17682 a3 ‘Architecture & 174 3219 804 Town planning Hotel 106 1860 454 management & Catering Total 6,60,380 1,78,809 14, It is stated that the new faculty student ratio is not only going to create a defective education system but is also going to be liable for a loss of a massive amount of intra-national brain drain. Students presently opting for B.E. education will not opt for it in future due to scarce quantity of teachers at engineering colleges, These students will opt for higher science degrees, which cannot develop and stimulate the knowledge up to the level of engineering education. Naturally, as a result of this anticipated downfall, the youth shall lose in global competition and nation shall also lose many crores of its technically qualified human resource. Further, the professors who are retained are also going to come under the thumb of the management of privatey institutions and shall be intimidated to work for less salary by pointing ai the 1.78 lacs professors who are rendered jobless by these new draconian ratios. That it is respectfully stated that it would not be correct to say that norms and,standards have no connection with the quality of education. In Preeti Srivastava (Dr.) & Anr, Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors. (W.P, (C)- 290/197): the Hon’ble Supreme Court held: - “But any lowering of the norms laid down can, and do have an adverse effect on the standards of education in the institutes of higher education. Standards of education in an institution or college depend on various factors. Some of these are: (1) The calibre of the teaching staff: (2) A proper syllabus designed to achieve a high level of education in the given span of time; (3) The student-teacher ratio;" Respondent No, 2 had failed to implement proper faculty student ratio earlier, and now aims at reducing the ratio without even strengthening the inspection techniques at colleges. The faculty student ratio of 1:20 is irrational and therefore shall severely17, \5 jeopardize the education infrastructure of the nation since the most critical resource today for engineering education is qualified faculty. That it is stated that in a developing country like ours, the rhost critical resource today for education in a field of engineering is a qualified faculty. There is a vast difference in the quality of education imparted in various Indian Institute of Technology and other colleges. Undoubtedly, one of the primary factors for this great disparity is the difference in the faculty student ratio, which is being followed, in such prestigious institutes. That the Respondent No. 1 and Respondent No. 2 are duty bound to ensure that the professors of private institutions are- not harassed in anyway ae their rights are protected. It is respectfully submitted that Respondent No. | is also duty bound to ensure quality education in private institutions and, therefore, this present petition is being filed to ensure that improper norms and standards are not being imposed upon the private institutions by notification of such draconian rules. That the present petition is being filed for the benefit of lakhs of staff and faculty members working in private engineering colleges all over the country, who shall be deprived of their right to employment, which is their fundamental right, if the newfaculty-student ration comes into force. The instant Petition is also being filed in order to benefit more than 50 lakh of students studying in the various engineering colleges governed by AICTE Act. BRIEF FACTS:- 19.That the Petitioners are a group of association of teachers and professors that have come together with a sole objective of protecting the rights Of teachers and professors in private engineering institutions across the nation. It is stated that the present petition is being filed to prevent violation of fundamental rights of teachers and professors granted under the Constitution of India. 20.That it is stated that news regarding the proposed change in the faculty ~ student ratio had been doing rounds in technical universities across the nation since mid-2017. Accordingly, the All India Federation of Self Financing Technical Institutions (AIFSFT!), having members of around 20 different State Associations, under the leadership of Dr. Anshu Kataria, President and Sri R. S, Munirathinam, Chief Patron met AICTE Chairman and submitted a memorandum to consider the request fix the faculty ratio as 1:25. The same was reported vide an article-dated 04.04.2017 in a newspaper ‘Punjab Express’ and thereafter on 28.08.2017. The true typed copy of the article-dated 04.04.2017 is hereby annexed as ANNEXURE- P6- (Page No“324-S3%), And the true typed copy of the article dated+ 28.08.2017 is hereby annexed as ANNEXURE- P7 (Page No. 338-342) 1 21 That it is stated that even before official release of the said notification, the Handbook of 2018-2019 was made available on vatious social media (like Whatsapp etc.), apprising the concerned professors about the ‘unofficial’ change in the faculty - student ratio. Hence, e “the Petitioner No. 3, in a bona fide effort from their end, had requested for the date of publishing the Handbook for 2018-2019 through an RTI filed on 26.11.2017 in order to confirm the said news. The Petitioner No. 3 received a reply dated 16.12.2017 to the RTT dated 26.11.2017, stating that the handbook is released on the Respondent No. 2’s website. The true typed copy of the RTI dated 26.11.2017 is hereby annexed as ANNEXURE- P8 (Page No. U3 S4F The true typed copy of the reply dated 16.12.2017 to RTL ; datéd 26.11.2017 is hereby annexed as ANNEXURE- P9 (Page No. e whet) + 22,The Petitioner No, 1 had sent a representation dated 30.11.2017 to the Respondent, No. 2 requesting the latter to maintain the faculty student ratio to 1:15 and not amend it to 1:20 in the Engineering colleges in India from the academic year 2018-2019. It is submitted that no reply was received by the Petitioner No. 1 and on 15.12.2017; the Handbook for the year 2018-2019 was released by the Respondent No, 2, amending the faculty student ratio to 1:20 forrogram such as Engineering & Technology etc. The true typed : copy of the répresentation-dated 30.11.2017 is herewith annexed as ANNEXURE-P10 (Page No.3449-259). 23,That it is stated that the Petitioner No. 3 had also filed an online petition to the Hon’ble Prime Minister seeking support from eitizens of Tndia oe against the irrational faculty student ratio notified in the Handbook 2018-2019 by the Respondent No, 2. The online petition was filed on 16.12.2017 seeking “withdrawal of 1:20 faculty student ratio by AICTE”. It is further stated that approximately 13,000 citizens have signed the said online petition, showing massive support against the irrational amendment in the faculty student ratio. A true typed copy of the online petition dated 16.12.2017 is annexed herewith and marked as ANNEXURE-P11 (Page no.353- 5+ ) and a compact disc containing signatures received in the online petition are annexed herewith and marked as ANNEXURE-P12 (Page: no. -8S% = . 24,Further, it is stated that the Petitioner No. 1 had submitted a detailed representation dated 27.12.2017 to the Respondent No. 2 personally (by hand) in presence of all other officials and representatives of managements of private institutions explaining the consequences . and effects of increment of faculty student ratio on professors, Itis respectfully submitted that the representation also mentioned that19 amendment in the faculty student ratio would violate the fundamental right of various professors and teachers. across the nation. Through the said representation, the Petitioner No. 1 also apprised the Respondent No. 2 of the other duties of the professors, which are being performed by the faculty in each department, apart from regular class work. The true typed copy of the representation dated 27.12.2017 is hereby annexed as ANNEXURE- P13 (Page NoBSA-36-) 25.That it is stated that the present change in ratio has been introduced without taking into account that the faculty in every private engineering college is expected to perform many other duties apart from regular classes and lab instructions. Apart from regular classes, the following duties are also being performed by the faculty in each department: - Teaching & Guiding B.Tech, M.Tech Students © Coordination of Class Review Committee (UG & PG) * Coordination of various groups formed in colleges © Preparation of several files of NBA (National Board of Accreditation) (PG & UG) Mentoring the research papers and paper publications © Guiding the Ph.D. students * Proctoring of proctorial studentsQ2 © Coordination of professional bodies * Overall administration and upkeep of library, lab etc. 26.That it is stated that to meet the requirements of affiliations and inspections, several private engineering colleges are in the practice of appointing fake staff members, The founder of the Petitioner No. 3 had also reported the consequences and effects of the amendment of the faculty student ratio in an interview dated 21.12.2017, given to a leading newspaper “The New Indian Express”, wherein he stated: “Because of this new ratio, lakhs of students will face the consequences of staff deprivation. On the other hand, existing staff may be threatened to work for less salary, else face job loss like their contemporaries sent out in the context of change in faculty-cadre ratio”. ‘ It is submitted that the private institutions are not even following the earlier ratio of 1:15, which was supposed to be implemented in the previous Handbook for the year 2017-2018, The said fact has been stated by the Chairman of the Respondent No. 2 himself, and the same was reported in sathe article dated 21.12.2017. A true typed copy of the article-dated 21.12.2017 is. annexed herewith and marked as ANNEXURE-PI4 (Page NoeG-340). Further, it is stated that it is an open secret that private institutions are involved in a malpractice of hiring fake faculty members to match the norms and standards of Respondent No. 2. It is submitted that in the current scenario there are multiple number of fake faculty appointed in27. 2) private institutions, which shows that faculty student ratio of 1:15, is also not being followed. The Respondent No, 1 has stated “Aadhar number has helped identify 80000 ghosts teachers in various colleges and institutions”. The same has been widely reported in a recent article dated 06.01.2018 in a leading newspaper “The Times of India’, The true typed vopy of the article-dated 06.01.2018 is hereby annexed as ANNEXURE- P15 (Page No. 341-335 THE NATURE OF INJURY CAUSED TO THE PUBLIC & LIKELY TO _BE CAUSED TO THE PUBLIC: - The following paras 28.1 to 28.8 set out the nature of injury caused to large number of staft/employees working in private engineering colleges all over India and injuries likely to be caused due to the said activities: 27.1, DEFECTIVE EDUCATION SYSTEM: That due to the reasons mentioned above, the amended faculty student satio is going to hamper the education system in private institutions in our country. The improper norms and standards in the Handbook for 2018-2019 released by Respondent No. 2 is causing grave injury to the faculty members of the private engineering colleges under Respondent No. 2. It is submitted that the faculty student ratio of 1:20 amounts to violation of their fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution. The increase in27.2, ‘ gr number of students per teacher will increase the burden on every teacher, thereby hampering the quality of education imparted by the said teacher, eventually causing a fall in the standard of education in the field of technical education in India, Being a developing country, having a defective education system, especially in an exceedingly important field of technical education, is not a risk worth taking. The action taken by the Respondent No. 2 is bound to have a ripple effect that will cripple the entire field of technical education if not nipped inthe buditself. LOSS OF HUMAN RESOURCES: The Petitioners state that it remains a common agenda of many private engineering colleges across the country that the faculty student ratio gets increased every year so that the _ institutions need not hire more professors. This in turn has a huge effect on the families of staff members. The colleges’ managements (mostly comprising a single family and its‘ members in the attire of an education trust). jeopardize the livelihood of thousands of employees’ families. The Respondents No. 1 & 2 has conveniently been ignoring the said issues without realizing the impact of the same on the education system of our country. Instead of making the education system of the country robust and raising the standard of education by ensuring27.3, 2S propér norins and their implementation, the said Respondents have been mute spectators all. along, It is stated that a massive loss of human resources shall happen amounting to severe deterioration in the education system of our country lest the said amended ratio is not restored to the original 1:15 ratio, The quality of the education is severely being affected by ‘the improper norms and standards. being followed by the private engineering colleges under the aegis of the Respondent No. 2. EXPLOITATION OF THE PROFESSORS: That after the implementation of the new Handbook for 2018-2019, the faculty members working. in private institutions will come under the thumb of management of the said institutions, owing to the rigorous exercise of unemployment that will follow in order to get rid of the excess professors. Even though being Incrative profit yielding business organizations, families run most colleges in the false attire of non-profitable educational trusts. It is stated that there shall be grave exploitation of faculty members working in private institutions if, the amended ratio is not restored to the previous ratio. This aspect is bound to create a lawless scenario in the education sector wherein faculty members of private institutions are and ' will continue to be harassed with overburdening of work in274. 27.5, return for low wages/salary. 2y UNEMPLOYMENT: That 1:20 faculty student ratio will create large scale unemployment, It is stated that a massive number of faculty members will lose their jobs after the implementation of the Handbook for 2018-2019, 1t is respectfully submitted that management of private engineering institutions will have to dismiss number of faculty members in the light of the recent amendment in the ratio, thereby violating their fundamental right granted under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India. For most nations, opportunities for employment are one of the key factors for development of the nation as whole. It is stated that implementing 1:20 faculty student ratio will not only violate the fundamental right of professors but also will deeply affect the development of our nation as the quality of education imparted to the children will also be severely affected, FORCED LABOUR: This economic exploitation by private engineering colleges is a different and discreet and ‘legal’ form of exercising ‘forced labour’. The quality of education is severely affected by the economic harassment of the faculty members in these colleges due to which the nation's growth is silently but firmly hit, These corrupt27.6. 27.7. 2s educational institutions remain responsible for the decline in educational standards, which also badly .affects the career of the students, FUTURE OF THE STUDENTS IN DANGER: That burdening staff with more number of students will put the future of the students of technical education in prejudice. It is.stated that staff shall be burdened with work and will not be able to focus on the growth and education of its students, thereby resulting in severe decline of the quality of education imparted The professors are also required to perform other duties such as helping students with project, eae organization and management of co-curricular activities, mentoring research papers and moral discipline etc. It is respectfully submitted that the future of the students is in grave danger as the staff shall not be able to procure time to motivate and stimulate the minds of students. INTRANATIONAL BRAIN-DRAIN: It is respectfully submitted that due to the poor quality of educatjon imparted in the country, institutes which have an autonomous status shall only exist. More than thousand colleges under Respondent No. 2 will eventually have to be closed within a short span of 5-10 years, as they willi ab not be able to sustain without providing quality education. The future of technical education is in danger, as a lot of students shall be compelled to take admissions in universities outside the country. The poor quality ofthe technical education shall demotivate studeits who are aiming to study in India and therefore there shall be an emigration of qualified students to other countries for higher studies, It is further stated that this scenario will deeply affect the economy of our nation, resulting in . slowing the development process. 278, DIRECT IMPACT ON FAMILIES _OF FACULTY/STARF: That as per the AICTE’ (Respondent No. 2) website (Dashboard/Graphicai representation) during the academic year 2015-16, the total number of staff in all the affiliated institutions of Respondent No. 2 was about 7,00,000 (as per the records of AICTE). It is further stated that for Engineering & Technology colleges alone, the number is a staggering 5,78,000. Even if the number is taken as an approximate of 5,00,000, the same accounts for 5,00,000 families with direct benefits from employment in these private engineering colleges. If indirect employment is to be considered in the ratio of 1:3 then, a total of 20,00,000. families with around 1,00,00,00 people are affected28. 28.1 28.2. QF economically by the decisions taken by the Respondent No. 2 VIOLATIONS OF LAW VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 21 STITUTION: ‘That the implementation of the 1:20 faculty student ratio violates the fundamental ‘Right to Life” granted under Article 21 of the Constitution of the faculty members of private institutions since 1:20 faculty student ratio will create large scale unemployment. It is stated that a massive number of facuity members will lose their jobs after the implementation of the Handbook for 2018- 2019 thereby directly violating fundamental right granted under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. VIOLATION OF . ARTICLE __19(1)(g)__ OF THE CONSTITUTION: That the new faculty student ratio implemented by Respondent No, 2 amounts to violation of their fundamental right under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution as held by Hon’ble Supreme Court of India tilted as 4 \. In T.M.A. Pai Foundation v. State of Karnataka: (AIR 2003 SC 355 ) The Supreme Court has observed as follows”:~ | “Article 19(1)(g) employs four expressions viz, profession, \ \ occupation, trade and business.... Article 19(1)(g) uses the