* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + WP(C) 21488/2005 MASTER SHASHANK MOHAN ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Diwakar Singh,Adv. versus THE COUNCIL OF IITS & ANR. ..... Respondents Through: Mr. Maninder Singh, Mr. Kirtiman Singh and Mr. T. Singhdev,Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA O R D E R % 20.01.2009 The petitioner is a 12th standard student and is aspirant for getting admission in the Indian Institute of Technology (IIT). The petitioner is challenging the eligibility criteria of Joint Entrance Examination (JEE), 2006 which came into force w.e.f. academic year 2006. This new eligibility criteria was introduced on 1.10.2005 and relevant portion reads as follows:- “Eligibility 1. Candidates appearing in (10+2) or equivalent qualifying examination in 2006 must secure at least 60% (55% for SC/ST and PD) marks in aggregate in their respective Board Examination. In case the respective Boards award letter grades, without providing a norm for converting them to equivalent percentage marks, the norms decided by the Joint Implementation Committee of JEE shall be final (details to be provided in the Information Brochure of JEE-2006). 2. A student can have only two attempts to write JEE with effect from 2006-in the year in which he or she passes the XII standard examination and/or in the following year. 3. Candidates who join any of the IITs, IT-BHU, Varanasi and ISM, Dhanbad through JEE-2006 will NOT be permitted to appear in JEE in future. 4. xxxxxxxx” 2. The contention of the petitioner is that the respondent-Council has no power to prescribe eligibility criteria i.e. 60% marks in +2 examination for admission to under-graduate courses at the respondent Nos. 2 to 8. It is contended that the Council cannot bypass or ignore the statutory authority of All India Council of Technical Education (AICTE). It is contended that the said change in admission criteria for JEE is arbitrary and is not based on rational or relevant consideration. 3. It is further contended that the provisions restricting and giving only two attempts to write and appear in JEE exams as well as to debar a candidate who has joined any IIT, I.T.-BHU, Varanasi and ISM Dhanbad from appearing in JEE in future are arbitrary and discriminatory. 4. IITs are constituted under separate enactment of Parliament i.e. The Institutes of Technical Education Act, 1961 and regulated by the IIT Council with the Minister of Human Resource Development as the Chairman. The Joint Entrance Examination (JEE) is an entrance examination for admission to IIT, IT-BHU, Varanasi and ISM, Dhanbad. AICTE prescribes the guidelines for admission to Engineering courses conducted in the country. AICTE guidelines have no applicability to courses conducted by the IITs in the country. It is also well settled that it is permissible for the institutes to prescribe minimum eligibility qualification which can be higher than the one prescribed by AICTE. In this connection, reference may be made to judgments in WP(C) No. 290/1997 titled Dr. Preeti Srivastava and Anr. V. State of M.P. & Ors. reported in (1999) 7 SCC 120 and Tamilnadu and another versus S.V. Bratheep & Others reported in AIR 2004 SC 1861. In Pranjal Verma & Sawalia Saurabh versus Union of india & Ors. reported in 1994(31)DRJ(DB) a Division Bench of this Court has held that prescription of 60% qualifying marks by Delhi College of Engineering cannot be said to be in violation of the guidelines laid down by AICTE inasmuch as the institute has authority to impose its own eligibility conditions for admission to maintain its academic standards which are higher than the minimum standard prescribed and no interference by the Court is called for. 5. In the affidavit filed on behalf of the Council it has been explained that it is only to achieve the highest standards in the courses conducted by the IITs and to make its further objective to rationalize the process of selection of students that minimum stipulation of 60% marks has been prescribed. The fixation of minimum marks of 60% in the plus two examination is neither illogical or irrational. 6. The challenge to the stipulation restricting/giving only two chances and the provision debarring a candidate from appearing in JEE once he takes admission in any of the IITs, IT-BHU, ISM- Dhanbad is also without any substance. These are essentially matters of policy and would not be questioned under Article 226 of the Constitution unless it, per se, is irrational or discriminatory. 7. In these circumstances, we find absolutely no substance in this petition. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed. CHIEF JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA, J. JANUARY 20, 2009 Rd