In this case, it has been laid down that the UGC can only lay down guidelines and standards for examination and not mandate the held at a particular date. This was submitted by Senior Advocate Arvind Datar who represented the State of Maharashtra. According to Entry 66 List 1 of the Constitution which deals with coordination and determination of the standards of examination.
Based on the arguments, Justice Ashok Bhushan declared that authorities know what is good for the welfare of the students and students are not capable to decide what is good for them. Justice R Subhash Reddy asked whether not conducting exams would dilute the standards. To this Advocated Datar said that the IITs conferred degrees without the final exams being conducted. If such reputed institutions can do so why can’t it be followed by the State of Maharashtra? A 3-year student will have his CGPA as the average of his 1st 5 semesters making the end semester exams not compulsory.
To this, the Solicitor General said that all universities do not follow the semester system. This was opposed by Advocate Datar who said that the semester system was followed everywhere and UGC regulations apply across the country.
Datar submitted that the issue mandating UGC to conduct exams was outside its mandate and ultra-vires of the UGC Act. Just mandating Kerala, Odisha and Maharashtra to conduct final year exams was a violation of Article 14. Also, the availability and access to online exams to every student was a big issue and not within the capacity of all student.
The UGC direction to hold exams on 30th September was taken without consulting anyone in Maharashtra and finding the situation of the state. Therefore, the Court went ahead and reversed the earlier judgement.