Uniformity needed for admissions in universities

Uniformity needed for admissions in universities
Source: DNA, November 13, 2018

Mumbai: The Bombay High Court has said that the Maharashtra government needs to have a uniform mechanism of the admission process for students in all its universities.

A division bench of Justices B R Gavai and M S Karnik observed earlier this month that there is a disparity in the admission process in some educational institutions.

It was hearing petitions filed by two students challenging decisions of two different colleges for refusing them admission to masters course in law.

According to the petitioners, they had inadvertently mentioned marks secured by them in the final year of their graduation instead of the average marks secured during their three-year degree course.

The bench noted that there is a disparity in the procedure followed in different colleges and universities on the issue of which marks are to be taken into consideration.

“On account of this disparity, students are suffering,” the court said.

In some universities, the marks obtained only in the last year are considered as those obtained in the graduation while some universities consider the average of the marks obtained in all the years’ examinations, as the final marks, it said.

“We find it appropriate that at least in all the universities, which are under the control of Maharashtra state, there should be some uniform practice on this issue. One uniform mechanism needs to be followed for admission procedure,” the court said.

The bench also said that a “hyper-technical” approach should not be adopted by universities and colleges while giving admissions to students of various courses. —PTI

Student is a consumer, can file complaint

Source: Times of India dt. 10th November 2019, p.5

Student is a consumer, can file complaint

Jehangir B Gai

Aditya was a student studying in Oberoi International School, Goregaon. As the school had refused to allow him to appear for his exams, his mother filed a complaint before the Mumbai Suburban District Consumer Forum alleging deficiency in service and unfair trade practice.

The Forum dismissed the complaint on the ground that a student cannot be considered a consumer. Aditya’s mother challenged this order and argued her own appeal in person. She pointed out there were several precedents in which a student had been held to be a consumer.

The Maharashtra State Commission pointed out that conduct of exams by statutory boards was not considered to be a service-,but in the absence of any legal binding, it would be incorrect to hold a student is not a consumer. Besides, there were several rulings of the National Commission as well as the Supreme Court where it had been held that failure to adhere to the guidelines of the University Grants Commission constituted an unfair trade practice, and suitable relief was granted to students under the Consumer Protection Act.

In its order of November 1 delivered by Justice A P Bhangale for the bench along with A K Zade, the Commission held since the law did not debar a student from redressing his grievance before the consumer fora, the complaint ought to have been adjudicated on merit. The complaint was remanded back to the Forum to decide whether or not the school was responsible for deficiency in service or unfair trade or restrictive trade practice.

Conclusion: A student can approach the consumer forum against educational institutions which make bogus claims of affiliation, commit breach of University Grants Commission guidelines, misrepresent about the available infrastructure, or any other grievance which can be termed deficiency in service or unfair or restrictive trade practice.

(The author is a consumer activist and has won the Govt.of India's National Youth Award for Consumer Protection. His email is jehangir.gai.columnist@outlook.in)

Sexual Harassment at the Workplace

Source: Indian Express, Mumbai, 10 October 2018

SEXUAL HARASSMENT AT WORKPLACE

Source: Times of India, Mumbai, 10 October 2018

If you touch a woman inappropriately, you could go to jail for 5 yrs

As India has its #MeToo moment, here’s a look at the laws that are in place to make our workplaces safe for women. Vishaka guidelines, promulgated by the Supreme Court, were in place since 1997. This was superseded in December 2013, when the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013, or POSH Act, was passed. The Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013, was also passed and Section 354 was added to the Indian Penal Code. This defines sexual harassment and the penalties for the offence. Additionally, with sexual harassment being a crime, employers are obligated to report offences