REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION (C) NO. 535  OF 2008             

Avinash Singh Bagri & Ors.            .... Petitioner(s)

Versus

Registrar IIT Delhi & Anr.       .... Respondent(s)

WITH

WRIT PETITION (C) NO.10 OF  2009

& I.A. NO. 4 OF 2009

AND

CONTEMPT PETITION (C) NO. 145 OF 2009  

IN  

W.P. (C) NO. 535 OF 2008

J U D G M E N T  

P. Sathasivam, J.

1) Avinash Singh Bagri and five others have filed Writ Petition (C) No. 535 of 2008 in this Court  

under Article 32 of the Constitution of India airing their grievance that most of the Scheduled Caste  

and Scheduled Tribe students who have been given admission in IIT-Delhi are being denied the right  

to pursue their studies by the respondent-Institution on the ground of poor performance and such  

students are being expelled and their admissions are being cancelled after one year or two years.   

2) Ravindra Kumar Ravi and two others who have been similarly placed and expelled by IIT-

Delhi  by similar  orders  dated 21.05.2008 and 02.06.2008 filed  a  separate  writ  petition,  i.e.,  Writ  

Petition (C) No. 10 of 2009 highlighting their similar grievance before this Court.

3) The  above-said  petitioners  belong  to  reserved  categories  (SC/ST/OBC).   They  were  the

students of       IIT-Delhi and pursuing the B.Tech. Course.  They got admission in IIT Delhi through  

All India Joint Entrance Test in the year 2004-2005.  These petitioners have been expelled from the  

B.Tech Course as they could not make the required average credits in their second year.

4) It is the case of the petitioners that in spite of providing reservation in higher education like  

Medical and Engineering streams, no coaching or any other facilities are provided to SC/ST/OBC  

candidates to enable them to compete with other general category students, as a result of which, more  

than 90% SC/ST/OBC students are dropped out from these higher courses in first year or second year.  

As a result of which the reserved seats in higher courses are lying vacant and unfilled.  In the year  

2008, about 85% reserved seats remained unfilled in IITs.  For the last ten years, in the Courses at  

IITs, about 90% SC/ST/OBC students are either dropped out or were declared fail in the first year or  

in the second year.  The reservation made by the Central Government/State Governments becomes  

redundant as no infrastructure is provided to SC/ST/OBC candidates to enable them to acquire bench  

marks.  The duration of B.Tech Course is   4-5 years which is divided into 8/10 semesters depending  

upon the stream.  The said durations are extendable for a further period of two more years to enable  

the students to pass out the course.   

5) The  academic  performance  of  a  student  is  monitored  at  the  end  of  each  semester  by  the  

Standing Review Committee (SRC) of the Senate.  At the end of each semester, if a student fails to  

satisfy  the  minimum  academic  criteria  laid  down  for  continuation  as  a  student,  the  SRC  would  

recommend the termination of  registration of the student.   According to the criteria,  a  student  in  

general category must secure at least 20 credits and a student in SC/ST/OBC category must secure at  

least 16 credits at the end of the 2nd semester failing which his/her registration would be terminated.  

In the second year, a student in general category must secure at least 50 credits while SC/ST/OBC  

category student must secure 46 credits at the end of 4th semester failing which his/her registration  

would be terminated.  A student’s registration may be terminated at the end of the 3rd year, 4th year or  

5th year if he/she fails to earn at least 84, 120 or 156 credits respectively.  

6)  Unlike in Delhi, in the other IITs like Kharagpur, Bombay, Chennai, Guwahati and Roorkee, if  

a student fails to achieve the required average credits in the first year or second year, he/she is not  

expelled  from the  institute.     For  such  students,  there  is  a  programme  known as  “Slow Track

Programme”. If a student clears a subject, he is awarded with full credits, assigned to the subject.  

Besides, the student is also awarded with marks for each subject according to the method mentioned in  

the guidelines issued by the concerned IITs.  Each student is also awarded with a grading.  Apart from  

this, every student is also awarded with Semester Grade Point Average (SGPA) and at the end of the  

4/5 years course before granting the degree of B.Tech, Cumulative Grade Point Average (CGPA) is  

awarded  to  every  student.   The  determination  of  passing  marks  is  left  to  the  discretion  of  the  

concerned Professor.  In IIT-Delhi, there is no such “Slow Track Programme” for the students who  

failed to achieve the required credits in the first and second year.  Such students in other IITs are  

properly advised by the Standing Review Committee (SRC) duly constituted by the concerned IIT  

institute.  Though, such SRC is in existence at IIT-Delhi, the said SRC is biased and does not extend  

any help to the reserved category students.     

7) In all the IITs except Delhi, the students are allowed to take up summer courses/examinations  

for making up any shortfall in their average credits.  However, in          IIT-Delhi, students of second  

year  who  fail  to  make  up  the  required  average  credits,  are  not  allowed  to  take  up  summer  

courses/examinations  and  they  are  expelled.   As  per  the  guidelines  of  IIT-Delhi,  minimum 75%  

attendance is required for each subject and if a student fails to make 75% attendance in a subject, he is  

not allowed to take up examination in that subject.   

8) Apart  from the above, the petitioners highlighted their  individual grievance, the method of  

treatment and the discrimination being followed by IIT-Delhi in respect of SC/ST/OBC students.  By  

proceedings dated 21.05.2008 and 02.06.2008 of the Deputy Registrar, IIT-Delhi, these petitioners  

were expelled and their names were struck off from the roll of the institution.  

9) In these circumstances, the petitioners in both the petitions approached this Court for quashing  

of the proceedings of the first respondent-Institution dated 21.05.2008 and 02.06.2008.  They also  

prayed for appropriate directions to the IIT-Delhi–first respondent to allow the petitioners to pursue  

their studies pursuant to the admissions granted to them on the basis of their respective merits.   

10) Pursuant to the notice issued by this Court,  on behalf of the IIT Delhi,   Deputy Registrar  

(Legal),  has filed   a  counter  affidavit  highlighting  their  stand wherein  it  is  stated  that  the Indian  

Institutes  of  Technology  are  institutions  of  national  importance  established  through  an  Act  of

Parliament, i.e., The Institutes of Technology Act, 1961.  IIT-Delhi is one of the seven Institutes of  

Technology created as centres of excellence for higher training, research and development in science,  

engineering and technology in India.   

11) Petitioners in Writ Petition (C) No. 535 of 2008 had joined the respondent-Institution in the  

academic year 2006-07 and 2007-08 (Petitioner Nos. 1-4 in the year 2006-07 and Petitioner Nos. 5-6  

in the year 2007-08) after clearing the All India Joint Entrance Examination for all the IITs in the  

years 2006 and 2007.    It is stated that in IIT-Delhi for evaluating the performance of a student, a  

“credit  system”  of  evaluation  is  followed.   Each  candidate  undertaking  these  highly  professional  

courses are required to secure the minimum prescribed credits in each year and a particular prescribed  

total number of credits towards the end of the courses.  If any candidate fails to secure the minimum  

number of credits at the end of each academic year, it would not be possible for any such candidate to  

secure  the  minimum prescribed  total  number  of  credits  towards  the  end of  the  course.   In  these  

circumstances,  the  admission  of  the  candidate  is  terminated  as  per  the  norms  laid  down  by  the  

Institute.   Clause  2.3  of  the  prospectus  for  the  academic  year  2006-07  which  was  issued  to  the  

petitioners upon admission into IIT-Delhi specifies the “credit  system” followed at the respondent  

Institute.  The academic performance of a student is monitored at the end of each Semester by the  

Standing Review Committee (SRC) of the Senate.  At the end of each Semester, the SRC identifies  

students who do not meet the required criteria i.e., if a student’s cumulative earned credits fall below  

16 times the number of regular Semesters spent by the student at IIT Delhi or his/her CGPA falls to  

4.75 or less.   

12) For a SC/ST/OBC student, the average credits required in order to complete the course is lower  

than a general  category student.   A student of reserved category has to secure only 46 credits as  

against a general category student who has to secure at least 50 credits in order to avoid termination at  

the end of 2nd semester of the  2nd year.   The “Prospectus” and “Courses of Study” booklets carry the  

rules and regulations by which student of that particular year will be governed/assessed.  Each student  

of the institute is attached to a Course Advisor, a faculty member of the department to which the  

student is admitted.  The course adviser helps the student to plan his curriculum besides looking after  

his general welfare.  The academic performance of each student is monitored by the “Standing Review

Committee” (SRC) and the “Departmental Monitoring Committee” (DMC) constituted by the Senate  

of the Institute.    

13) In addition to the general  guidelines,  procedure,  rules and regulations,  the deponent  of the  

affidavit has also highlighted the performance of each petitioner and the steps taken by IIT.  He has  

also reiterated the orders passed by various High Courts and by this Court in maintaining standard and  

discipline in these institutions. A similar counter affidavit has been filed in Writ Petition (C) No.10 of  

2009.  We feel that the same is not required to be reproduced.

14) We have heard Mr. D.K. Garg, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Mr. P.P. Rao,  

learned senior counsel for the first respondent – IIT-Delhi in both the writ petitions.   

15) Mr. P.P. Rao, learned senior counsel, appearing for the IIT-Delhi, by taking us through factual  

details mentioned in I.A.No.4 of 2009, submitted that all the six petitioners in Writ Petition (C) No.  

535 of 2008 were unable to secure the minimum credits in spite of providing additional opportunities.  

He pointed out that petitioner No.1 in W.P.(C) No. 535/2008 was admitted in the Institute in the  

academic year  2006-07 through the All India Joint Entrance Examination conducted jointly by all  

IITs.  At the end of the 1st Semester of the 1st year, the performance of petitioner No.1 was not up to  

the mark as he earned only 12 credits.  His performance was considered by the SRC in its meeting  

held in December 2006.  Based on the decision, a letter dated 23.01.2007 was sent to his parents  

requesting them to advise their son to meet the Course Advisor for further help.  In the 2nd semester of  

the 1st year, after Minor-1 examinations, the performance of the petitioner was again monitored by the  

SRC.  As his performance was found to be below average, by a letter dated 28.02.2007, he was asked  

to meet DMC on 07.03.2007.  Though petitioner No.1 was registered for the summer semester in 2007  

in 3 subjects wherein he could earn 12 credits, due to the poor academic performance the petitioner  

was able to earn only 4 credits and he was again advised to meet DMC.  In the 4th Semester (2nd  

Semester of 2nd year) because of his poor performance, he was able to earn only 5 credits and was  

again advised to meet DMC on 26.02.2008.  This time, he met DMC and after discussing at length the  

difficulties experienced by the students, the DMC advised him to devote more time to studies, attend  

classes regularly and meet the course coordinator of the concerned courses for getting assistance on  

difficulties experienced in the specific course.  He was also advised to meet the SC/ST adviser.  At the

end of the 4th Semester (2nd year, 2nd semester) the SRC in its meeting held on 20.05.2008 monitored  

the performance of petitioner No.1 with other students and decided that as per the Institute regulations  

“the students who had earned credits less than the minimum stipulated requirement for continuation of  

registration be terminated from the Institute.”    The SRC also noted that for a termination at the end of  

1st or 2nd year, an appeal is not allowed as per the Regulations.  At the end of the 2nd year, 2nd semester,  

petitioner No.1 earned only 32 credits as against the stipulated minimum requirement for continuation  

of 46 credits for students belonging to SC/ST category.  In the same way, Mr. P.P. Rao pointed out the  

performance appraisal of other petitioners.     

16) It is true that the petitioners were not able to secure the required credits as against the stipulated  

minimum requirement for continuation of their studies.  It is relevant to mention that admittedly all  

these petitioners had joined the Institute in the academic years 2006-07 and 2007-08 after clearing All  

India Joint Entrance Examination conducted jointly for all the IITs in the years 2006 and 2007.  It  

shows that they were successful in securing the minimum cut-off marks earmarked for the SC/ST  

categories.  In such circumstances, it cannot be claimed that all these students are not fit to be admitted  

in IIT.  Mr. D.K. Garg, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners strenuously submitted that there  

is no use in providing reservation in higher education/higher courses in IIT, Medical and Engineering  

streams when no extra facilities are provided to SC/ST/OBC candidates to enable them to compete  

with  other  general  category students.   He also  contended that  no extra  coaching or  facilities  are  

provided to them in these higher courses as a result of which more than 90% of SC/ST/OBC students  

are dropped out from these higher courses in the 1st year or 2nd year and as a result, the reserved seats  

in higher courses are lying vacant and unfilled.  He further contended that even in the current year,  

about 85% reserved seats remained unfilled in IITs.  Though Mr. Rao, by placing the materials pointed  

out  that  these  students  and  other  similarly  placed  students  were  given  proper  advise,  warning,  

intimation to the parents permitting them to interact with the professors etc., the fact remains that no  

special or extra coaching or any other facilities were provided to these candidates in these higher  

courses.  It is pointed out that though the duration of B.Tech Course is 4/5 years which is divided in  

8/10 semesters depending upon the stream, the said durations are extendable for a further period of  

two years to enable the students to pass out B.Tech course.  We have already pointed out that in IIT-

Delhi, the required average credits for general category students in the first year are 20 credits and for  

reserved category students are 16 for their promotion in the second year.  If a student does not succeed  

in getting required average credits, he is expelled from the Institute.  Similarly, in the second year,  

general category students require an average of 50 credits, while reserved category students require an  

average of 46 credits.  If a student fails in achieving the required credits in IIT-Delhi, such student is  

expelled from the Institute.  By placing relevant materials, Mr. Garg pointed out that unlike Delhi in  

other IIT Institutes like Kharagpur, Bombay, Chennai, Guwahati and Roorkee, if a student fails to  

achieve required average credits in the first year or second year, he is not expelled from the Institute.  

For such students, there is a programme known as “Slow Track Programme” (STP).  The relevant  

provision of STP, as provided under B.Tech/Dual Degree/M.Sc. rules of IIT, Bombay reads thus:

“8.4 Slow Track Option.

For students with up to four backlogs (FR/XX) at the end of first and second years, a  separate slow-track programme should be worked out by the faculty adviser and got approved  by  UGAPEC,  to  enable  him/her  to  complete  the  degree  requirements  over  a  longer-than- normal duration (considering the maximum duration indicated in 8.5).  The performance of  such  students  should  be  monitored  on  a  semesterly  basis  and  requisite  corrections  in  the  programme as warranted should be made from time to time.   

Students having FR/XX grades (in up to four courses) are advised to opt for slow track  option in their own interest, in consultation with their faculty advisers.  Otherwise, they will be  at risk of early termination if more backlogs are accumulated as per rule 8.7.

8.5 Maximum period for Completion of Programme In any case, a student should fulfill the requirements for his/her respective degree within the  maximum  period  specified  for  each  degree  as  given  below,  including  withdrawal  in  exceptional  circumstances,  failing  which  his/her  case  will  be  referred  to  the  Senate  for  dismissal:-

B. Tech. programme: Six years M.Sc. 2 Yr Programme: Three years M.Sc. 5 Yr. Programme: Seven years Dual Degree Programme: Seven years”

It is pointed out that if a student clears a subject/course, he is awarded with full credits, assigned to the  

subject/course.  Besides, the student is also awarded with marks for each subject/course according to  

the method mentioned in guidelines, issued by the concerned IITs.  Each student is also awarded with  

a grading.  Apart from this, every student is also awarded with Semester Grade Point Average (SGPA)  

and at the end of 4 years/5 years course, before granting degree of B.Tech, Cumulative Grade Point

Average (CGPA), is awarded to every student.

17) Another  grievance  of  the  petitioners  is  that  the  awarding  of  passing  marks  is  left  to  the  

discretion of          the concerned professor.   For example, it  is  for the concerned professor to  

determine the passing marks from 30% to 50% according to his discretion.  If a student gets passing  

marks decided by the concerned professor,  such student  is  awarded with full  credits  as has  been  

assigned to the concerned course/courses.

18) It  is also highlighted that the said programme which is in existence in other IIT Institutes  

except Delhi has been introduced for the purpose of making students to cover up their deficiencies or  

to make up their required credits.  There is no dispute that in IIT-Delhi, there is no such Slow Track  

Programme for the students who failed to achieve the required credits in the first year and second year.  

Such students in other IITs are being properly advised by the Standing Review Committee (SRC)  

constituted by the concerned IITs.   

19) Another difficulty pointed out by the petitioners is that though there is some concession in  

getting credits in the first and second year for reserved category students admittedly for third year,  

both general and reserved category students have to secure 84 credits in order to get promotion.  It is  

also brought to our notice that in         IIT-Delhi if a student after third year could not make the  

required average credits, there is a provision of making an appeal to the Dean of Under Graduate  

Students (UGS).  It is the discretion of the Dean to allow such students to take up the fourth year  

course or not.  It is also highlighted that most of the students are being allowed to take up the fourth  

year course and ultimately students can complete their B.Tech course within a maximum period of 6/7  

years (now the same is increased to 8 years).

20) Mr. Garg next pointed out that in all IIT’s except Delhi, the students are allowed to take up  

summer  course/examinations  for  making  up  for  shortfall  in  their  average  credits.   In  IIT-Delhi,  

students of the second year who fail to make up the required average credits are not allowed to take up  

summer course/examinations and they are being expelled.  It is the grievance of the petitioners that  

though by our order dated 05.01.2009, we directed the first respondent-Registrar, IIT-Delhi to allow  

the petitioners to attend classes for the session 2008-09 subject to further orders of this court and  

payment  of fees,  if any.   It  is pointed out that,  these petitioners were not allowed to take up the

summer course.  It is not in dispute that first of all, these petitioners were not permitted to attend the  

summer course and secondly, by attending the summer course, each student gets 12 grades.  Though  

IIT-Delhi has permitted these petitioners to attend their classes for the session 2008-09, they were not  

allowed to avail the summer course which deprived them in getting 12 grades.  Had these petitioners  

been allowed to participate in the summer course, it could be possible for them to secure reasonable  

grades which ultimately could push their performance above the cut-off marks.  There is no plausible  

explanation for not permitting them to avail the summer course.   

21) If we analyze the credits secured by these petitioners with a requirement of minimum credits in  

the first two years by permitting them to avail summer course and by conducting extra/additional  

coaching or training including English subject, it would be possible for them to cross the minimum  

required credits to attend third year and so on.  Though the first respondent has specifically denied that  

there is no discrimination on the basis of caste or any complaint was made to the appropriate authority,  

the fact  remains that  additional/extra  efforts  were not  fully afforded to these students  in  order  to  

compete with the general category students and also secure the minimum required credits in first and  

second year.  

22) The  information  furnished  by  the  Government  of  India,  Ministry  of  Human  Resource  

Development, Department of Higher Technical Education, Section-I, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi in  

their letter dated 16.12.2008 (01.01.2009) addressed to one of the petitioners shows that the following  

information for the year 2008 is relevant:-

IIT Delhi ITI Kharagpur IIT Guwahati IIT Kanpur No.  of  expelled  students involved 20 02 01 01 Action  taken  by  the  Ministry of HRD

Being examined Request/Appeal  could  not  be  agreed  to.  Students  have  been  informed  accordingly.

Director,  II  Guwahati  has  been  requested  to  reconsider  the expulsion of  the student.

IIT Kanpur has been  requested  to  give  their comments.

The above particulars are not a valid ground to accept the claim of the petitioners, however, the fact  

remains that only at IIT-Delhi, 20 students were expelled in the year 2008, though similar syllabus are  

being followed in other IITs, the expulsion is minimal.

23) Learned  counsel  appearing  for  the  petitioners  has  brought  to  our  notice  that  even  while  

considering the appeal by these expelled students, the authority concerned, particularly for the year  

2008 has not followed a uniform standard.  While strengthening the above contention, Mr. Garg has  

pointed out the case of the following two candidates:-  

S. N o.

Name Entry No. Ca t.

Earn ed

EC Remarks

19 Shyamded Ranjan 2004ME10525 SC 49.0 180 Appeal Allowed 20 Alok Singh Mahor 2005CS50207 SC 51.0 218 Appeal Allowed

Though these two students earned credits less than the required, their appeals were allowed by the  

competent authority.   This shows that they are not consistent with these procedures and in certain  

circumstances these conditions are being varied and the students who secured less than the minimum  

required credits are allowed to continue their studies.  

24) It is pointed out that though one of the petitioners produced medical certificate for his illness,  

according to the counsel for the petitioners, the same was not properly appreciated and considered.  

25)  We have mentioned certain instances to show that these petitioners were not fully responsible  

for their expulsion but at the same time we are conscious of the fact that IIT-Delhi in order to maintain  

and continue their high standards of education, implemented certain aspects which were helpful to the  

petitioners.  But the fact remains that in spite of such efforts, unfortunately, these petitioners were not  

able to secure the minimum grades.  

26) It is not in dispute that SC and ST are separate class by themselves and the creamy layer  

principle is not applicable to them.  Article 46 of the Constitution of India enjoins upon the State to  

promote with special care the educational and economic interests of the weaker sections of the people  

and protect them from social injustice and all forms of exploitation.  These socially and economically  

backward categories are to be taken care of at every stage even in the specialized institutions like IITs.  

They must take all endeavour by providing additional coaching and bring them up at par with general  

category students.  All these principles have been reiterated by the Constitution Bench of this Court in  

Ashok Kumar Thakur vs. Union of India & Ors., (2008) 6 SCC 1.

27) Considering the various aspects including the fact that (a) appeal provision is available from

third year and no such facility for the first and second year; (b) duration of study is now extended by  

spreading over up to eight years; (c) absence of slow paced course; (d) failure to accommodate these  

petitioners in the summer course in spite of order of this Court; (e) even candidates who secured lesser  

grade  than the  minimum were allowed to go to next  academic  session by allowing their  appeals  

(authorities are not consistent in considering similarly placed candidates); (f) out of nine students as on  

date three were not interested and six persons alone want to continue their course, we are of the view  

that ends of justice would be fully met by giving one more opportunity to them.  Accordingly, we  

direct the first respondent to consider their case afresh in the light of the various aspects mentioned  

above and in view of the peculiar facts, re-apprise their performance taking note of special features  

available/applicable to these reserved categories and take a decision one way or the other within a  

period of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment.  We make it clear that the first  

respondent IIT-Delhi is free to pass appropriate orders by considering all the aspects mentioned above  

including  the  policy  of  the  Government  of  India  in  providing  reservation  to  bring  them  in  the  

mainstream along with others.

28) With the above direction, both the writ petitions are disposed of.  In view of the disposal of the  

writ petitions, no orders are required in I.A. No. 4 of 2009 and Contempt Petition (C) No. 145 of 2009.  

No costs.          

  …….…….……………………CJI.

                                        (K.G. BALAKRISHNAN)

    ...…………………………………J.          (P. SATHASIVAM)                                  

   ...…………………………………J.    (B.S. CHAUHAN)                                  

NEW DELHI; AUGUST 12, 2009.