Case: PRANEETH K &amp; ORS.  Vs. UNIVERSITY GRANTS COMMISSION (UGC)

2.In Writ Petition (C) No. 724 of 2020, Praneeth K and Others Vs. University Grants Commission and Others, a common counter affidavit, additional affidavit and affidavit in reply to the UGC has been filed. The State of Maharashtra has also filed affidavits in Writ Petition (C) No. 724 of 2020. All the parties in Writ Petition (C) No. 724 of 2020 are represented. Other writ petitions and special leave petition are tagged with Writ Petition (C) No. 724 of 2020. The decision in Writ Petition (C) No. 724 of 2020 shall be sufficient to answer the issues raised in this batch of cases.Writ Petition (C) No. 724 of 2020 - Praneeth K and Ors. Vs. University Grants Commission and Ors.3. This writ petition has been filed by 31 students pursuing undergraduate or postgraduate terminal semester/final year courses in different Universities located in different States across the country. The petitioners are studying in different Universities located in States of Kerala, Maharashtra, Assam, Gujarat, Himachal Pradesh, Uttarakhand, NCT Delhi, Orissa, Madhya Pradesh, West Bengal, Haryana, Uttar Pradesh, Bihar and Meghalaya. Petitioners case is that due to pandemic COVID-19, Government of India announced the nationwide lockdown w.e.f. 24.03.2020 in order to contain the spread of COVID-19. The Ministry of Health & Family Welfare, Government of India issued various directions, guidelines and SOPs. Various educational institutes and Universities extended their dates of examination for various courses postponing the same indefinitely.4. UGC constituted an Expert Committee to deliberate and make recommendations regarding issues of examination and academic calendar. The Expert Committee submitted its report on basis of which UGC issued guidelines on 29.04.2020, in which guidelines it was proposed to take the final year university examination by 31.07.2020. Number of COVID cases being still rising, the above Expert Committee was requested by UGC to revisit the guidelines. The Expert Committee submitted its report, which was approved by UGC on 06.07.2020 and UGC revised the guidelines and issued academic calendar for final year examinations. In view of COVID-19 pandemic, the revised guidelines provided that Universities are required to complete the examinations by end of September, 2020 in offline (pen and paper)/online/blended (offline + online) following the prescribed protocol/guidelines relating to COVID- 19. On 06.07.2020, the Ministry of Human Resource Development formulated SOP for conduct of the examination duly vetted by Ministry of Health and Family Welfare. On 06.07.2020, the Ministry of Home Affairs by a letter permitted the Ministry of Human Resource Development to conduct the examination by Universities and institutions.5. The petitioners case is that the decision of the UGC, Ministry of Human Resource Development and Ministry of Home Affairs to conduct the final term/final examinations of Universities and institutions throughout the country amid COVID-19 pandemic is extremely arbitrary, whimsical and detrimental to the health and safety of the students as well as violative of fundamental rights of lakhs of students enshrined under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India including those of the writ petitioners.6. In pursuance of the guidelines dated 06.07.2020, various institutions and colleges have issued notifications notifying the final year examination. Many universities and educational institutions of India and abroad have issued their admission notification for the year 2020-2021 wherein the last date of online registration was 31.07.2020 and unless a candidate possess the degree before that he cannot apply for admission. Representation dated 09.07.2020 has been submitted to the Minister of Human Resource Development to find an alternate way to save the careers of the students. The petitioners have further claimed that various other examination Boards like CBSE, ICSE, ISC have cancelled their Xth/XIIth Board examination due to COVID-19 pandemic and has declared the result on the basis of past performance/internal assessment. On one hand, the UGC has exempted the students of intermediate years/semester from appearing in the examinations due to COVID-19 outbreak and on the other hand has forced the final year students to appear in the examinations, which is discriminatory and arbitrary. The petitioners in the writ petition have made following specific prayers:-a) Issue urgent Writ In the nature of mandamus or any Other appropriate Writ, Order or Direction to quash and set aside the Letter bearing D.O. No.F.1-1/2020 (Secy) dated 06.07.2020 issued by the Respondent No.1 UGC (Annexure P-3) AND the Office Memorandum bearing F.No. 16-16/2020- U1A dated 06.07.2020, issued by the respondent No. 3 MHRD (Annexure P-4) AND Notification bearing NW/RK/PK/AD/DD dated 06.07.2020, issued by the Press Information Bureau, Government of India (Annexure P-5) whereby all the Universities and Colleges across India have been directed to conduct final Term/final year examinations by 30.09.2020; and/orb) Accordingly, issue urgent Writ In the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, Order or Direction to the Respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3 to not conduct the final Term/ final Year examinations of all Universities/ institutions across India; and/orc) Issue urgent Writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, Order or Direction to the Respondent Nos.1, 2 and 3 to declare results of the Petitioners and other similarly situated students of the final Term/ final Year examinations of all Universities/ Institutions across India, on the basis of their past performance/ internal assessment and to award marksheets and degrees to all successful students on or before 31.07.2020; and/ord) Issue urgent Writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, Order or Direction to the Respondent Nos.1, 2 and 3 to also adopt CBSE mechanism end provide subsequently another chance to Improve marks to those willing students, who may be unsatisfied with their score based upon their past performance or Internal assessment; and/ore) Pass any other order or direction as this Honble Court may deem it and proper In the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice.7. By our order dated 27.07.2020, we had directed the petitioners to serve a copy to learned Solicitor General as well as learned counsel for the UGC. Three days time was given to file the counter affidavit and rejoinder was directed to be filed on next date. In pursuance of order dated 27.07.2020, a common counter affidavit dated 30.07.2020 has been filed by UGC. UGC has also filed additional affidavits. An affidavit dated 05.08.2020 was also filed by the State of Maharashtra in Writ Petition (C) No. 724 of 2020, reply of which was filed by the UGC vide its affidavit dated 17.08.2020. Pleadings were complete in Writ Petition (C) No. 724 of 2020, consideration of which writ petition shall answer all issues raised in this batch of cases.Writ Petition (Civil) No. 739 of 2020 – Yuva Sena Vs. University Grants Commission and Ors.8. This writ petition has been filed as a public interest litigation by the petitioner, which is youth wing of Shiv Sena, registered and recognized political party in India. After issuance of revised guidelines dated 06.07.2020 by UGC, the petitioner claims to have addressed a letter dated 07.07.2020 to Minister of Human Resource Development praying to reconsider the decision of compulsorily conducting final year examinations. Petitioners case is that UGC had issued earlier guidelines dated 29.04.2020, which were advisory in nature and each University was to chart out its own plan of action taking into consideration the issues pertaining to COVID-19 pandemic. Petitioners case is that revised guidelines have been passed in ignorance of rising cases of COVID-19 and have crated great fear in the minds of students around the country especially in the States of Maharashtra, West Bengal, Tamil Nadu and Delhi. The impugned guidelines have not taken into account the consequent risk of life to which the students writing examinations would be exposed to.9. Petitioners case further is that various States are suffering gravely from pandemic of COVID-19 and respective State Governments have imposed/implemented various levels of lockdown under the Disaster Management Act, 2005. Petitioner pleads that as a result of the lockdown, Universities, schools, educational institutions were forced to shut down and to postpone the terminal semester/final year examinations. Petitioner pleaded that pursuant to the UGC guidelines dated 29.04.2020, the Ministry of Higher and Technical Education, State of Maharashtra had set up a State level Committee in view of the grave situation of pandemic COVID-19, which Committee submitted a report on 06.05.2020 and recommended that the final year exams may be conducted between 01.07.2020 to 31.07.2020, the said recommendations were objected by petitioner and representation was made to cancel the examinations. Petitioner also claims to have made a representation to the Government of Maharashtra requesting for not to hold any examinations. On 19.06.2020, the State of Maharashtra vide a Government Resolution dated 19.06.2020 took a resolution for cancellation of the terminal semester/final year examinations considering the safety of health and life of the students and for the allotment of grades and aggregate marks to students based on their previous semester and internal marks.10. Petitioners case is that cases of COVID-19 are increasing day by day in the State of Maharashtra and many college buildings in the State of Maharashtra have been requisitioned by the State Government / its bodies like Municipal Corporation to be converted into quarantine centres and for other public purpose in view of present pandemic COVID-19, hence it is impractical to hold examinations. In the writ petition, petitioner has also given certain details with regard to different States pertaining to number of COVID-19 cases like States of Tamil Nadu, NCT of Delhi, Gujarat, Karnataka, Uttar Pradesh, Telangana, Andhra Pradesh, West Bengal and others, the decisions taken by different States of not conducting final examinations. Petitioner also referred to and relied on judgment of this Court in Writ Petition (C) No. 566 of 2020 – Amit Bathla & Ors. Vs. Central Board of Secondary Education & Anr, where this Court noticed the notifications issued by CBSE cancelling the examinations for classes Xth/XIIth, which was scheduled from 01.07.2020 to 15.07.2020. petitioner in the writ petition has also prayed for a writ of Certiorari setting aside the impugned revised guidelines dated 06.07.2020 issued by UGC and O.M. dated 06.07.2020 issued by Ministry of Human Resource Development. It has also prayed to clarify and declare that as per UGC guidelines dated 29.04.2020, each university may chart out its own plan of action with respect to terminal semester/final year examinations taking into consideration the issues pertaining to the COVID-19 pandemic.Writ Petition (Civil) No. 746 of 2020 – Yash Dubey and Anr. Vs. Union of India and Ors.11. This writ petition has been filed by petitioner No.1, a final year law student and petitioner No.2, an association of lawyers registered under Society Registration Act, 1860 namely, Youth Bar Association of India. The petitioners plead that cause of action for filing of the writ petition has arisen on 06.07.2020 when Ministry of Home Affairs issued notification dated 06.07.2020 and the UGC issued revised guidelines dated 06.07.2020. The petitioners case is that in view of increasing number of COVID-19 cases, many States like Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, Punjab and Maharashtra have announced cancellation of examination of final year students and for promotion of the final year students. The petitioners further pleaded that on 11.07.2020, Tamil Nadu Government wrote a letter to HRD Minister informing that they are not in a position to conduct college examinations for the final year students. Another letter dated 11.07.2020 by Punjab Higher Education Minister written to HRD Minister is referred where all decisions dated 06.07.2020 was asked to be reviewed, decision of Government of Delhi dated 11.07.2020 to cancel all ongoing examination have also been referred to. Petitioners have prayed for setting aside the notification dated 06.07.2020 issued by Ministry of Home Affairs and revised UGC guidelines dated 06.07.2020. The writ petitioners have also prayed for certain other payers to provide for alternative mode of assessment of the final year students in wake of COVID-19 outbreak; to call upon Universities to submit a set of parameters for evaluation of the students on the basis of students past performance and accordingly award provisional degrees to the students and to promote the students on the basis of the performance in the previous semesters by taking an aggregate score for all the semesters.Writ Petition (Civil) No. 741 of 2020 – West Bengal College and University Professors Association(WPCUPA) and Anr.Vs. Union of India & Ors.12. This writ petition has been filed by the West Bengal College & University Professors Association (WBCUPA) through its President. The petitioners pleaded that on 27.06.2020 in the State of West Bengal, all Vice Chancellors and Registrars of the Universities held a meeting with the Minister and arrived at a consensus for alternate method of marking of final semester examination in the State and decided to declare the result by 31.07.2020. A memorandum dated 27.06.2020 was issued by the Government of West Bengal, Department of Higher Education to the above effect. Petitioners case is that revised UGC guidelines is in abject contravention of students welfare since by the time these examinations through special chance will be conducted most of the Universities have closed their admission application for postgraduate courses. With the continuous spike in COVID-19 cases in the entire country including the State of West Bengal, situation will not at all be conducive to conduct offline examination by 30.09.2020. The petitioner also refers to letter dated 11.07.2020 written by Chief Minister of West Bengal to Honble Prime Minister requesting to get the matter re-examined and restore the earlier advisory of UGC dated 29.04.2020. Petitioners have also referred to various representations made by various Universities from State of West Bengal to UGC to reconsider its decision to hold examinations. Petitioners in writ petition has prayed for Mandamus commanding the respondent No.1 to forthwith rescind and/or cancel and/or withdraw the letter dated 06.07.2020.Writ Petition (Civil) No. 745 of 2020 – Krushna Govind Waghmare and Ors. Vs. University Grant Commission and Ors.13. This writ petition has been filed by five petitioners, who are final year law students of various educational institutions affiliated to Universities of Maharashtra. Petitioners case is that UGC before issuing the revised guidelines have not considered the deadly COVID-19 pandemic. Petitioners have also referred to cancellation of Xth and XIIth examinations by CBSE and ICSE. Petitioners have prayed for quashing the guidelines dated 06.07.2020 and has further prayed that this Court may be pleased to grant the benefit of decision dated 19.06.2020 (State of Maharashtra) to the students of professional courses and necessary directions to the respondent State may also be issued.Writ Petition (Civil) No. 794 of 2020 – Sarthak Mehta and Ors. Vs. University Grants Commission (UGC) and Ors.14. This writ petition has been filed by three petitioners. Petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 are advocates and petitioner No. 3 is a final year law student studying in Pune. Petitioners case is that earlier UGC guidelines dated 29.04.2020 left the decision to take or not to take the examinations of the students with the Universities keeping in view the spread of COVID-19 whereas impugned guidelines dated 06.07.2020 have made it compulsory for the Universities to conduct final year examinations by the end of September, 2020 irrespective of the spread of COVID- 19 in different regions/States. Petitioners case is that impugned guidelines is ultra vires to the Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution. Petitioners have also prayed for quashing the guidelines dated 06.07.2020 and for quashing the O.M. dated 06.07.2020 of Ministry of Human Resource Development and letter dated 06.07.2020 and it has been further prayed that result of students be declared on the basis of previous semester/year performance/internal evaluation.Writ Petition (Civil) No. 814 of 2020 – Ritesh Anil Mahajan and Ors. Vs. The Maharashtra State Disaster Management Authority and Ors.15. This petition has been filed by four petitioners out of which three are students and fourth petitioner is member of Senate of University at Jalgaon elected from the graduates constituency. The State Disaster Management Authority of the State of Maharashtra has been impleaded as respondent No.1, State of Maharashtra as respondent No.2 and UGC as respondent No.3. The petitioners plead that the Ministry of Higher and Technical Education of the State of Maharashtra set up a State-level Committee headed by the Vice-Chancellor, Mumbai University in view of grave situation created by COVID-19 pandemic. The Committee submitted its report on 06.05.2020 recommending that the final year exams be conducted between 01.07.2020 to 31.07.2020. The statement of Chief Minister dated 31.05.2020 has been referred to where he declared that no examinations will be conducted for final year students and all students will be given marks by averaging the marks obtained in the previous semester examinations.The State Disaster Management Authority in its meeting dated 18.06.2020 took various decisions resolving that taking into consideration the state of COVID-19 in the State of Maharashtra, examination of final year professional courses cannot be arranged. With regard to non-professional courses, decision was also taken for declaring their result as per decision taken in the meeting. The State of Maharashtra issued a resolution dated 19.06.2020 regarding non- professional and professional courses, the methodology for declaring the result. The petitioners are challenging the decision taken by State Disaster Management Authority dated 18.06.2020 as well as the resolution of the State of Maharashtra dated 19.06.2020 and have prayed for setting aside the aforesaid two decisions.Writ Petition (Civil) No. 861 of 2020 – Souvik Pal Vs. The State of West Bengal16. This petition has been filed by a final year B.Sc. student studying in a College of State University of West Bengal. The petitioner is challenging the decision dated 27.06.2020 issued by State Government of West Bengal regarding the undergraduate and postgraduate examinations, 2020. The State of West Bengal vide its decision dated 27.06.2020 issued an advisory to the effect that for the evaluation of students in terminal semester /final year of the General Degree courses at undergraduate/postgraduate level, 80% weightage shall be given to the best aggregate percentage obtained by the candidate in any of the previous semesters/years results and 20% to internal assessment during the current semester/year as adopted by the university. The petitioner in the writ petition has prayed for quashing the order dated 27.06.2020 and also prayed for a direction to the State of West Bengal and State Universities to comply with the UGCs revised guidelines dated 06.07.2020, O.M. of Ministry of HRD dated 06.07.2020 and UGCs letter dated 08.07.2020.Writ Petition (Civil) No. 862 of 2020 – Kalicharam Gajbhiye and Anr. Vs. The Maharashtra State Disaster Management Authority and Ors.17. This writ petition has been filed by two students, who are studying in a University in the State of Maharashtra. Petitioners have challenged the decision dated 18.06.2020 of the Maharashtra State Disaster Management Authority as well as the decision of the Government of Maharashtra dated 19.06.2020 and subsequent decision dated 13.07.2020 of the Maharashtra State Disaster Management Authority and further prayer was made that State of Maharashtra and State Universities therein be requested to comply with the UGCs revised guidelines dated 06.07.2020, O.M. of HRD Ministry dated 06.07.2020 and UGCs letter dated 08.07.2020.SLP(C)No.10042(Diary No. 15056) of 2020 – Kajal Mishra and Ors. Vs. Union of India and Ors.18. This special leave petition has been filed by six petitioners challenging the judgment and common order dated 14.07.2020of the Division Bench of High Court of Delhi in Writ Petition (C) No. 3199 of 2020 – Prateek Sharma and Anr. Vs. Union of India and Anr. with other connected writ petitions. The petitioners were not party in the writ petition before the High Court. The High Court in its order dated 14.07.2020 noticed that entire scheme of examination has to be worked out afresh by the Delhi University and dates for conducting examinations of various undergraduate courses to be finalized. The Delhi High Court directed the University to issue a notification at the earliest placing on the record the revised schedule of the examination. The writ petition before the Delhi High Court is still pending and in pursuance of order dated 14.07.2020 the examinations in Open Book Examination (OBE) mode had already commenced. Petitioners case is that in batch of writ petitions filed in the Delhi High Court, the conduct of examination by online mode was also challenged. The petitioners plead that other Universities are evaluating their final year students through internal assessment and the students of Delhi University shall be deprived of the equal opportunity in respect of admission and post graduate employment opportunities etc.19. In the writ petitions although no formal notice was issued but, in all writ petitions the respondents have appeared through counsel(except W.P.No.739 of 2020). In Writ Petition No.739 of 2020 all the States and Union Territories were impleaded as respondents in addition to University Grants Commission as respondent No.1, Ministry of Human Resource Development, respondent No.2, Ministry of Home Affairs, respondent No.3. The State of Maharashtra and NCT of Delhi appeared through their counsel and filed affidavits. The State of Orissa has also appeared through its Advocate General. We have not issued notice to all the States who were impleaded in Writ Petition No.739 of 2020. The State of Maharashtra, State of West Bengal, NCT of Delhi and State of Orissa have sufficiently presented the stand of the States and Union Territories. The above States/UTs have communicated the Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India that they are unable to hold the examination due to spread of COVID-19. Before us the cause of States, power of States and States Disaster Management Authority have been sufficiently represented. We are, thus, of the view that for deciding this batch of cases it is not necessary to issue notice to all the States and Union Territories and the issues raised can be decided after hearing the respondents, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, State of Maharashtra, State of West Bengal, NCT of Delhi and State of Orissa. We, thus, proceed to consider the submissions raised to decide the matter on merits.20. As indicated above in Writ Petition No.724 of 2020 pleadings are complete and in Writ Petition No.739 of 2020 convenience compilation in two volumes has been filed by the learned counsel for the petitioners. It shall be sufficient to refer the pleadings in Writ Petition No.724 of 2020 and convenience compilations for deciding all the issues raised before us.

Reasoning:
The Guidelines dated 06.07.2020 were issued in continuation to earlier Guidelines dated 29.04.2020. The Guidelines dated 06.07.2020 provided that Universities are required to complete the examination by the end of September, 2020 in offline (pen and paper)/online / blended (offline and online mode) all terminal semester/final year examinations 2020. The Guidelines dated 06.07.2020 intended that it is only after holding of terminal semester/final year examination, Universities may proceed to grant degrees.Undoubtedly, the UGC Act has been enacted in reference to Entry 66 List I57. Section 12 which enumerates the functions of the Commission provides that it shall be the general duty of the Commission to take, in consultation with the Universities or other bodies concerned, all such steps as it may think fit for the promotion and co- ordination of University education and for the determination and maintenance of standards of teaching, examination and research in Universities. The use of expression examination in Section 12 itself makes it clear that steps taken by the UGC under Section 12 may relate to the examination as well.60. The issue, which was raised before the Constitution Bench was whether the subject matter of admissions was covered exclusively by Entry 66 of List I, thereby the States had no legislative competence to deal with the subject of admissions or determination of fee to be charged by professional educational institutions. The said issue has been noticed in paragraph 98 in following words:-98. The next issue to be considered is whether the subject-matter of admissions was covered exclusively by List I Entry 66, thereby the States having no legislative competence whatsoever to deal with the subject of admissions or determination of fee to be charged by professional educational institutions.61. In paragraph 101, the Constitution Bench repelled the above submission and in the above context the observations were madehowever, that would not include conducting of examination, etc. and admission of students to such institutions or prescribing the fee in these institutions of higher education, etc.62. The Constitution Bench in paragraph 101 has used the expression not include conducting of examination etc. In the present case, there is no claim on behalf of the UGC that it is the UGC which shall conduct the examination of the graduate and postgraduate students. The examinations are to be conducted by the respective Universities only. The above observations made by Constitution Bench in paragraph 101 as relied by learned senior counsel for petitioner, cannot be treated to be laying down any preposition that University Grants Commission has no competence to lay down any standards with regard to examination. We, thus, are of the considered opinion that the Guidelines dated 06.07.2020 are not beyond the domain of the UGC and they relate to co- ordination and determination of standards in institutions of higher education.The Guidelines dated 29.04.2020 were issued with heading UGC Guidelines on Examinations and Academic Calendar in view of COVID- 19 pandemic and subsequent lockdown. With regard to examination of 2019-2020, several Universities have conducted examinations full or partial, some of the Universities were yet to commence their examination. At the outbreak of pandemic COVID-19, the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs issued various orders and had taken measures to prevent its spread across the country including lockdown where several activities were prohibited due to the situation as developed from the last week of March, 2020. Neither any teaching could be done in the colleges/ Universities nor any examination could be held for the months together. Since the examinations could not be held in the month of March to June, 2020, by which period usually the examinations of all Universities are completed and results are declared, UGC came with Guidelines on Examinations and Academic Calendar for the Universities.65. The Guidelines also contains academic calendar suggested for the academic session 2019-2020 and dates for conduct of examinations were also suggested as 01.07.2020 to 31.07.2020. It is true that Guidelines mentioned that Guidelines are advisory in nature and each University may chart out its plan of action taking into consideration the issues pertaining to pandemic COVID-19. A reading of the Guidelines indicate that ample latitude was given to the Universities to conduct terminal/intermediate/ semester year examinations in offline and online mode. The Guidelines, however, cannot be read to mean that Guidelines dated 29.04.2020 left it to the wisdom of the Universities to either conduct terminal semester/final year examinations or not to conduct, which is clear from clauses 4 and 5 under the heading Examinations. Clause 4 specifically provides that terminal semester /final year examinations for PG/ UG courses/ programmes may be conducted by universities as suggested in the academic calendar keeping in mind the protocols of social distancing. The academic calendar, which is part of the Guidelines suggested the date for start of the examinations as 01.07.2020. When we read clause 5, the difference between clause 4 and 5 is clear. With regard to intermediate semester /year students there is express mention that In case the situation does not appear to be normal in view of COVID-19, grading of the students could be composite of 50% marks on the basis of the pattern of internal evaluation adopted by the universities and the remaining 50% marks can be awarded on the basis of performance in previous semester. But this option is not mentioned in clause 4 of the Guidelines, which referred to terminal semester/final year examinations. The Guidelines dated 29.04.2020 was issued for a purpose and object with latitude to the Universities to chart their own plan/course but the argument cannot be accepted that Universities were not to follow the Guidelines on the pretext that it uses the expression advisory. The Revised Guidelines dated 06.07.2020 were issued looking to the situation that COVID-19 cases are still rising and likely to increase further and as per academic calendar in the Guidelines dated 29.04.2020, the examinations were to complete by 31.07.2020. The UGC requested the Expert Committee to revisit the Guidelines. The Guidelines dated 06.07.2020 in fact grant further time requiring the completion of examination by 30.09.2020. When we look into the substance of the Guidelines dated 29.04.2020 and Revised Guidelines dated 06.07.2020, it is clear that Guidelines dated 06.07.2020 are in continuation to the earlier Guidelines and not contrary to the earlier Guidelines. We have to look into the substance of the Guidelines and find out the intent and object of the Guidelines. The Guidelines were issued with the object that a uniform academic calendar be followed by all the Universities and final terminal semester/final year examinations be held. With regard to intermediate semester/year examination, the earlier UGC Guidelines dated 29.04.2020 have been continued even in the Revised Guidelines dated 06.07.2020. We, thus, do not accept the submission of petitioners that Guidelines dated 06.07.2020 are contrary to the earlier Guidelines.66. Now, coming to the first part of the issue that the Guidelines are non-statutory and advisory only, it is the case of both the parties that Guidelines have been issued by the UGC in exercise of power under Section 12. Section 12 of the Act provides that it shall be the general duty of the Commission to take all such steps as it may think fit for the promotion and co-ordination of University education and for the determination and maintenance of standards of teaching, examination and research in Universities. The words all such steps are of wide import. The steps referred to in Section 12 may include issuance of guidelines, directions, circulars etc. The Guidelines dated 06.07.2020 has to be treated to have been issued in exercise of statutory powers vested in the Commission under Section 12. Guidelines issued in exercise of statutory powers, thus, cannot be said to be non-statutory. There is one more reason to hold the Guidelines have statutory force. The University Grants Commission, in exercise of power under Section 26 sub-section (1) of the Act, 1956 have made the Regulations namely,the UGC(Minimum Standards of Instruction for the Grant of the Masters Degree through Formal Education)Regulations, 2003, on which both learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned counsel for the UGC have placed reliance.Regulation 6, which deals with examination and evaluation contains following regulation as Regulation 6.1:-6.1 The university shall adopt the guidelines issued by the UGC and other statutory bodies concerned from time to time in respect of conduct of examinations.67. The statutory Regulation, 2003 thus, categorically requires Universities to adopt the Guidelines issued by the UGC, hence, it is the statutory duty of the Universities to adopt the guidelines issued by the UGC. It is the statutory obligation of the Universities to adopt the Guidelines and the Guidelines cannot be ignored by terming it as non-statutory or advisory.70. The earlier guidelines provided that the examination may be conducted, however, an option was given with regard to intermediate/year students for their promotion on the basis of internal assessment and performance in the previous semesters. Holding of examination for the Final year students was made necessary by the impugned guidelines. The Final year/terminal semesters examinations are important because the learning process is a dynamic interaction where the only way to figure out what students know is to seek evidence of their knowledge and to evaluate it. Performance in examination especially Final year/terminal semester examination are reflection of competence of the students. Terminal semester/Final year examination also provides an opportunity to the students to improve upon their overall score/marks which are very crucial for academic excellence and opportunities of employment. Final year/terminal semester examination of under- Graduate or post-Graduate is an opportunity for student to show his optimum calibre which pave his future career both in academics and employment. We do not find any unreasonableness or arbitrariness in the revised guidelines of University Grants Commission dated 06.07.2020 which require all Universities/ Collages to conduct at least the final year/terminal semester examination.71. The differentiation made by revised guidelines to hold Final year/ Terminal semester examination has a rational basis and there is an intelligible differentia between the student of Final year/Terminal semester and other students. We thus reject the challenge on the ground that there is any hostile discrimination between the students of Final year/Terminal semester and other students.72. The further submission that the guidelines failed the test of Article 14 because they apply throughout India and being one fixed date i.e. 30.09.2020 irrespective of the conditions prevailing in the individual States/Universities also cannot be accepted. Even the earlier guidelines dated 29.04.2020 provided for an academic calendar which mentioned 01.07.2020 to 15.07.2020 for conduct of Terminal semester/Final year examination and 16.07.2020 to 31.07.2020 for Intermediate semester/year examination. When the academic calendar is set, fixed dates are always given for uniformity. The UGC had rightly fixed a date for completion of the Terminal semester/Final year examination throughout the country to maintain uniformity in the academic calendar.73. The students who look forward for admission in higher classes or take employment require final degree for their career prospect and to maintain uniformity in dates by which final examinations are over is with the object of students welfare and for their career and it cannot be said that since uniform date has been fixed by which Terminal semester/ Final year examination are to be completed, Article 14 has been violated.74. Both, the earlier guidelines as well as revised guidelines have taken due notice of the prevailing situation of Covid-19 and it cannot be said that the expert body is unaware of Pandemic spread throughout the Country. The criticism of guidelines that they are unreasonable does not inspire any confidence. Following features in the revised guidelines clearly indicate that expert body took measures in the interest of the students and their academic career: -(i) The academic calendar provided for in the earlier guidelines contemplated conduct of examination from 01.07.2020 to 31.07.2020. The revised guidelines noticed - The number of covid cases are still rising and likely to increase further…. The revised guidelines has granted further time for completion of examination till end of September, 2020, which was a step to facilitate Universities and Colleges to complete their examination which was a reasonable step in wake of the Pandemic.(ii) The guidelines made the conduct of examination flexible by providing three modes of examination:(a) Offline (Pen and Paper)(b) Online(c) Blended (Online + Offline)(iii) The revised guidelines also made a provision of examination through special chance in case a student of Terminal semester/Final year is unable to appear in the examination due to any reason.75. The provision for giving special chance to appear in examination is also in the interest of the students to protect those students who due to any reason are unable to appear in the examination. The above measures taken in the revised guidelines are reasonable and the criticism of the guidelines that they are unreasonable and manifestly arbitrary are without any substance. We thus do not find revised guidelines to be violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.77. There can be no doubt that it is the duty of the State to take care of the health of its citizens. The various measures taken by the specified authorities under the Disaster Management Act, 2005, are only with the object to contain the Pandemic and protect the health of citizens of the country. The criticism of the revised guidelines is that it ignores the fact that covid cases are still rising in the different part of the country and the guidelines had completely disregarded the health of the students and expose the students, teachers and non-teaching staff to the risk of contacting virus during the course of examination.78. It is relevant to note that the revised guidelines were issued taking into consideration the fact that the number of covid cases are still rising and likely to increase further which fact has been categorically mentioned in the beginning of the revised guidelines itself. Further, clause 6 of the revised guidelines specifically provides that every University/Institution has to ensure that it is prepared in all respect to carry out the academic activity following necessary protocols, guidelines, directions, advisories issued by the Central/ State Government from time to time in view of Covid-19.79. The University Grants Commission is conscious of increasing number of covid cases throughout the country and as observed above, the revised guidelines have extended the period for completion of examination from 31.07.2020 to 30.09.2020 which was only due to the reason that due to Pandemic, Universities/ Colleges may not have been able to hold the examination. Further specific provisions in the guidelines that all institutions have to follow necessary protocols, guidelines, directions, advisories issued as measures to contain Covid-19 makes it clear that there is no intent to protect the students, teachers, non-teaching staff from the deadly virus.80. It is also relevant to note that after issuance of revised guidelines dated 06.07.2020 OM dated 06.07.2020, Ministry of Human Resource Development (MHRD), has issued detailed guidelines for conduct of examination which guidelines were duly vetted by Ministry of Health and Family Welfare(MoHFW).The guidelines for conduct of examination were circulated by University Grants Commission vide its letter dated 08.07.2020, Standard Operating Procedure for conduct of examination is relevant which is quoted as below: -Standard Operating Procedure for conduct of Examination1. The instructions, guidelines and orders issued by the Central and State Governments concerning the opening of educational institutions and safety and health should be abided by the universities and colleges. However, they may develop more stricter provisions and guidelines, if they find it necessary,2. In case there is a restriction on movements in certain areas, admit/identity cards issued to the students should be treated as a pass for the movement of the students. State Governments should issue instructions to all local authorities to issue movement passes to invigilators and all personnel engaged in the conduct of examination.3. Entire examination centre floors and walls, doors, gates, should be sprayed with disinfectant.4. Fresh mask and gloves to be used by exam functionaries after staff verification is done.5. Sanitizer bottles should be arranged at the entry gate, examination rooms, staff/observer room, etc, and should be replenished regularly.6. All liquid handwash bottles should be replenished in restrooms and entry gate whenever required.7. Candidate Seating Area should be thoroughly sanitised (desk and chair) after every session.8. All the washrooms should be cleaned and disinfected.9. All door handles, staircase railing, lift buttons, etc, should be disinfected.10. Wheelchairs, if present at the examination centres, should be disinfected.11. All the trash bins should be cleaned.12. Staff verification and self declaration as suggested below must be done as soon as they report at the centre.a. Exam functionary must submit self declaration about health status.b. Thermo gun temperature check must be done at staff entrance point.c. If any Examination functionary fails to meet the self-declaration criteria, or thermo gun check, he/she will be asked to leave the examination centre immediately.d. Exam functionary needs to wear the mask and gloves at all the time.13. Cleanliness and hygienic conditions as per safety and health advisories of the concerned government departments are to be maintained at all places.14. Proper signages, symbols, posters, etc. should be displayed at appropriate place to maintain social distancing.15. Downloading of Arogya Setu App may be advised for every staff and student of the University and College.16. Adequate arrangements of thermal scanners, sanitisers, facemasks and hand gloves at all entry and exit points including the reception area. Wherever possible, students should be given fresh face masks by the invigilators in the examination room itself. 17. Avoid crowding at entry and exit points. 18. Opening all the gates, of entry and exit, in case HEIs have more than one gate.19. Senior staff should monitor the entry and exit. There should be proper markings with at least 2 metre distance where students stand while waiting for opening of the college gate. Exit of students should permitted one by one only.20. Thermal screening of students, wearing of face mask, sanitizing of hands etc. be ensured.21. The Invigilators, while on duty, should be continuously wearing mask, and proper hand gloves.22. The students should be asked to sanitize their hands before and after signing the Attendance sheet.23. Students having symptoms of fever, cough and cold should be either made to sit in a separate room or given a chance to appear on another day.24. Hand washing stations with facilities of liquid soap should be made available so that every student can wash her/his hand frequently.25. Keeping in view the physical distancing, institutions should have adequate rooms capacity to meet the proper seating arrangement for examination. Minimum distance between two students should be 2 metres. Sample seating plan is annexed.26. Adequate arrangements for safe drinking water be made on the campus.27. Adequate supply of water in toilets and for hand washing be ensured.28. Dustbins must be cleaned and covered properly.29. Proper sanitization of buses, other transport and official and vehicles of the institution.30. At the end of the day-a. Used gloves and masks should be disposed only in a pedal push covered bin at the Examination Centre and outside the examination room/hall.b. Safely dispose off all used masks and gloves discarded at the examination centres or outside the examination centre in trash bin bags at suitable place and as per standard guidelines issued by health authority.81. The Standard operating procedure for conduct of examination as extracted above make it abundantly clear that UGC, MHRD, and Ministry of Health and Family Welfare are fully concerned with the health of all stakeholders i.e. the students as well as exam functionaries.82. In view of the above, we are not persuaded to accept the submissions of the petitioner that the revised guidelines are violative of Article 21 of the Constitution.85. Section 12 begins with the words it shall be the general duty of the commission to take,... in consultation with Universities or other bodies concerned. What is the ambit and scope of expression Universities or other bodies concerned has fallen for consideration in the present case. The use of expression Universities or other bodies concerned is for purpose and object which is clear from subsequent enumerations of functions of the commission in the Section itself. For example, we may take functions of the commission as mentioned in sub- clause (d) which provides that the Commission may recommend to the universities any measures necessary for the improvement of the university education and advise the universities upon the action to be taken for the purpose of implementation of such recommendation. When we look into this sub-clause (d), it is clear that the function enumerated in sub- clause is only with regard to a particular university and for discharge of function by the commission with regard to sub-clause (d), it has to consult only the university concerned.86. The use of the word Universities or other bodies concerned in the opening part of the Section has been with a purpose of referring the universities or other bodies concerned for whom the function has to be performed by. The enumerations given from clause (a) to (j) indicate that apart from universities the function also include advice to the Central Government or any State Government on allocation of any grant to the Universities or advise Central Government or any State Government or any Universities on any question which may be referred to the commission by the Central Government or the State Government. Thus, the expression other bodies used in the opening part of the Section is in reference to other bodies apart from universities enumerated in Section 12. The expression Universities or other bodies concerned used in the opening part of the Section cannot be stretched to the meaning which is now sought to be given by the learned counsel for the petitioner.87. The submission that other bodies as used in Section 12 should include State Disaster Management Authority or health experts is misconceived. Section 12 never contemplated any such bodies. Furthermore, the State Disaster Management Authority came into existence only after enactment of Disaster Management Act, 2005, no such concept was there when the UGC Act, 1956 was enacted. The expression other bodies cannot be expanded as contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner. The use of the word concerned after Universities or other bodies has specific purpose and meaning. The consultation with the Universities or other bodies concerned was in reference to a particular function which was enumerated in clause (a) to (j) and it has specific reference and Universities or other bodies were referred to in the above context. Section 12 cannot be interpreted in a manner that for taking any measure with regard to coordination of university education and for determination and maintenance of standards of teaching examination in the Universities, the UGC should consult each and every University of each and every State and only then, such measures can be taken. Reading the provision in above manner shall make the functioning of UGC unworkable. There are more than nine hundred Universities in the country and to require UGC to consult more than nine hundred universities for taking any measure will make the functioning impossible and impractical.88. Section 12 cannot be interpreted in a manner that for taking any steps by the UGC, there is a mandatory requirement of consultation of all the States/Universities failing which no measures can be taken by the University Grants Commission. Clause (j) of Section 12 is couched in a very vide manner which empower the commission to perform such other functions as may be prescribed or as may be deemed necessary by the Commission for advancing the cause of higher education in India or as may be incidental or conducive to the discharge of the above function. Any function which may be deemed necessary by the Commission can be performed. For performance of its function by the Commission, the Commission of its own is fully competent to take decisions, issue any directions, guidelines, etc. The Commission may also take assistance of any Committee of experts in discharge of its functions for which there is no prohibition in the statutory scheme.90. The statutory scheme as delineated by Section 12 makes it clear that for the purposes of performing its functions under the Act as enumerated in clause (a) to (j), it is not mandatory duty of the Commission to consult with the Universities or other bodies concerned in all cases e.g. while allocating and disbursing out of the fund of the Commission, grants to the Universities as enumerated in sub- clause (b) and (c). It is not necessary to consult the university to whom the grant is to be allocated and disbursed. The expression in consultation with the Universities or other bodies concerned has to be read to mean where consultation with Universities or other bodies concerned is necessary without which the Commission is unable to perform its functions.90. The statutory scheme as delineated by Section 12 makes it clear that for the purposes of performing its functions under the Act as enumerated in clause (a) to (j), it is not mandatory duty of the Commission to consult with the Universities or other bodies concerned in all cases e.g. while allocating and disbursing out of the fund of the Commission, grants to the Universities as enumerated in sub- clause (b) and (c). It is not necessary to consult the university to whom the grant is to be allocated and disbursed. The expression in consultation with the Universities or other bodies concerned has to be read to mean where consultation with Universities or other bodies concerned is necessary without which the Commission is unable to perform its functions.92. Whether for collecting information relating to University education in India, UGC has to consult all 900 or more Universities and whether without consultation with the Universities, it cannot perform its functions under Section 12(h), the answer would be obviously that it is not necessary for UGC to consult all the universities while collecting information relating to University Education in India. The expression Universities or other bodies concerned has not be read in a rigid manner rather it is flexible as per requirement of the Commission. The residuary clause i.e. Section 12(j) cloth the Commission to perform such other functions as may be deemed necessary by the Commission. The guidelines dated 29.04.2020 and 06.07.2020 have been issued after consultation of an expert Committee headed by Prof. Kuhad. The guidelines have been issued after a report of an expert committee consisting of academicians and experts. It cannot be said that the Commission had no jurisdiction to issue guidelines without consulting all the Universities in the Country and all the States or Union Territories.93. The UGC is empowered to perform such other functions as may be deemed necessary by the Commission. If the Commission felt it necessary to issue guidelines after obtaining a report from the expert committee, no exception can be taken to the procedure adopted by the Commission. The guidelines dated 29.04.2020 as well as revised guidelines dated 06.07.2020 are general in nature and not confined to any particular university or any particular state. Hence, it cannot be said that UGC is obliged to consult all Universities or States before issuance of the guidelines.94. We thus, are satisfied that guidelines dated 06.07.2020 cannot be said to be violative of Section 12 of UGC Act, 1956.98. The guidelines dated 30.05.2020 were to remain in force till 30.06.2020 during which period some of the States have taken a decision not to hold the examination as directed by the UGC. For the purposes of this case it shall be sufficient to notice the decision taken by the Government of Maharashtra as well as the State Disaster Management Authority of State of Maharashtra. State Disaster Management Authority of Maharashtra in its meeting dated 18.06.2020 took a decision not to conduct the final year/terminal semester examination. The Government Resolution dated 19.06.2020 was issued by the Government of Maharashtra where the Government decided that taking into consideration the situation of COVID-19 in the State of Maharashtra final year examination of professional courses cannot be arranged. With regard to non-professional (traditional) courses Government resolved to declare result by way of adopting suitable formula after obtaining in writing from students that they intend to get the Degree without appearing in examination. On 18.06.2020 when the State Disaster Authority took the decision and the Government of Maharashtra issued Government Resolution the guidelines issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs dated 30.05.2020 did not expressly permit conduct of examination in Schools/Colleges. In paragraph 5 of the guidelines dated 30.05.2020 issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs, States/Uts, based on their assessment of the situation, were empowered to prohibit certain activities outside the Containment Zones, or impose such restrictions as deemed necessary. When the State Disaster Management Authority and the State Government (Maharashtra) took a decision not to conduct examination, the said decision was well within the guidelines issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs. Further Disaster Management Authority of the State is empowered under Section 38 to take measures for the purpose of prevention of disaster and mitigation. The decision taken by the State Disaster Management Authority on 18.06.2020 as well as the State Governments Resolution dated 19.06.2020 insofar they decided not to hold final year/terminal semester examination by 30.09.2020 was well within the jurisdiction of the said Authority. We have noticed that guidelines of UGC dated 06.07.2020 directed all Universities/Colleges to complete their examinations by 30.09.2020.99. The Disaster Management Act, 2005 empowers the State Disaster Management Authority as well as the State Government to take decision for prevention and mitigation of a disaster and the action taken by the authorities under the Disaster Management Act have been given overriding effect to achieve the purpose and object of the Act. In case of a disaster the priority of all authorities under the Disaster Management Act is to immediately combat the disaster and contain it to save human life. Saving of life of human being is given paramount importance and the Act, 2005 gives primacy, priority to the actions and measures taken under the Act over inconsistency in any other law for the time being in force. Section 72 begins with non obstante clause.103. A perusal of the OM dated 06.07.2020 indicates that the Ministry of Home Affairs has agreed to the request of the Ministry of Human Resource Development and granted exemption for the opening of educational institutions for the purpose of holding examinations/ evaluation work for Final Term Examinations of the Universities/Institutions. The said OM as well as letter of the Ministry of Home Affairs cannot be read to mean that it fettered the jurisdiction of the State Authority to take a decision considering the situation in a State with regard to conduct of examinations. The cumulative effect of OM dated 06.07.2020 and letter dated 06.07.2020 shall be that Government of India granted exemption for holding the examinations which shall be treated as exception to the guidelines dated 29.06.2020 issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs where Schools, Colleges, educational and coaching institutions were to remain closed till 31.07.2020. The said OM and letter dated 06.07.2020 permitting holding the examinations shall not fetter the power of the State Disaster Management Authority to take appropriate measures to contain the Disaster in the State.104. With regard to conduct of examinations, the State authorities are competent to assess the situation in a particular State regarding possibility of holding of examinations. No State shall permit health of its subject to be compromised that is why overriding power has been given to the State Disaster Management Authority and the State Government with regard to any inconsistency with any other law for the time being in force. We have noticed above that there are no orders or directions in the guidelines of the National Disaster Management Authority or National Executive Committee fettering the powers of the State Disaster Management Authority and a State Government to take a decision as to whether examinations by physical mode be permitted in particular State looking to the situation in the State. Coming to the guidelines dated 06.07.2020 of the UGC insofar as it directs completion of final examinations by 30.09.2020 which direction is overridden by the decision of the State Disaster Management Authority and State Government where it resolved not to hold the examinations. We, thus, conclude that direction of the University Grants Commission in its revised guidelines dated 06.07.2020 insofar it directs the Universities and colleges to complete the final year/terminal examinations by 30.09.2020 shall be overridden by any contrary decision taken by a State Disaster Management Authority or the State Government exercising power under the Disaster Management Act, 2005. Learned counsel appearing for the UGC has, in his submission, submitted that UCC shall be ready to consider any request received from any State to allow the Universities to re-schedule the date of final examinations and in the event any request is made to the UGC the deadline for completion of the examination can be extended by the UGC and the date of final examinations can be rescheduled.105. As noted above, the State Disaster Management Authority (State of Maharashtra) in its meeting dated 18.06.2020 as well as the State of Maharashtra in its Resolution dated 19.06.2020 have resolved to promote the students without taking the final examinations.106. The guidelines dated 06.07.2020 categorically directed all Universities/Colleges to hold the examination of terminal semester/final year, option for not holding the examination was given in the revised guidelines as well as the earlier guidelines only with regard to intermediate/year examination. Before us submissions have been addressed by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners contending that students can be promoted on the basis of previous year assessment and internal assessment which in no manner shall be lowering down the standard of education and the decision taken by the State Government and the State Disaster Management Authority to grant such promotion is perfectly in accordance with law. Referring to Regulations, 2003 it has been submitted that students can be promoted on the basis of cumulative grade point average. It is submitted that students have completed five semesters and no special importance can be attached to the last semester, hence the Maharashtra Governments decision to promote on the basis of previous assessment and internal assessment was in accordance with law.107. We have already held, while considering Issue No.1, that University Grants Commission Act has been enacted in reference to Entry 66 of List I. The States although have legislative competence to legislate on education including Universities but the State Legislation is subject to Entry 66 List I. The revised guidelines issued by UGC are statutory and referable to University Grants Commission Act, 1956 and shall have precedence as compared to any inconsistent decision taken by the State. We also need to consider as to whether in exercise of power under the Disaster Management Act, 2005, the State or State Disaster Management Authority could have taken any decision with regard to promote the students without undergoing final year/terminal semester examination. The purpose and object of the Disaster Management Act, 2005 is management of disasters and for matters connected therewith. The Disaster Management is a continuous and integrated process of planning,organising, coordinating and implementing measures.109. The exercise of powers by the State Disaster Management Authority or by the State Government which shall have overriding effect under Section 72 are those exercise of jurisdiction which are within the four corners of the Disaster Management Act, 2005. When the State Disaster Management Authority and State Government take a decision that for mitigation or prevention of disaster it is not possible to hold physical examination in the State, the said decision was within the four corners of Disaster Management Act, 2005. However, the decision of the Disaster Management Authority or the State Government that students should be promoted without appearing in the final year/terminal semester examination, is not within the domain of the Disaster Management Act, 2005. The decision to promote students and grant Degree by a State if contrary to any Central enactment or guidelines issued thereunder the Central enactment and the guidelines thereunder shall have precedence by virtue of the same being referable to Entry 66 List I. We, thus, conclude that the State Disaster Management Authority and the State Government has no jurisdiction to take a decision that the students of final year/terminal examination should be promoted on the basis of earlier years assessment and internal assessment whereas the UGC guidelines dated 06.07.2020 directed specifically to conduct final year/terminal semester examination. The UGC guidelines dated 06.07.2020 in the above respect shall override the decision of the State Government and the State Disaster Management Authority regarding promoting the students, does not fall within the jurisdiction of the Disaster Management Act, 2005 and shall have no protection of Section 72 of the Disaster Management Act, 2005. We, thus, conclude that the State or the State Disaster Management Authority have no jurisdiction under Disaster Management Act, 2005 to take a decision for promoting the students on the basis of previous performance or internal assessment which decision being contrary to revised guidelines of the University Grants Commission cannot be upheld and has to give way to the guidelines of UGC which is the Authority to issue guidelines for determination and maintenance of standards of education and teaching of the Universities.110. From the aforesaid discussion, we arrive at the following conclusions:(1) The Revised Guidelines dated 06.07.2020 issued by the UGC are not beyond the domain of the UGC and they relate to coordination and determination of standards in institutions of higher education.(2) The Guidelines dated 06.07.2020 are in continuation to the earlier Guidelines dated 29.04.2020 and are not contrary to the earlier Guidelines. We have to look into the substance of the Guidelines to find out the intention and object of the Guidelines. The Guidelines were issued with the object that a uniform academic calendar be followed by all the Universities and final /terminal examinations be held.(3) The Guidelines dated 06.07.2020 has to be treated to have been issued in exercise of the statutory powers vested in the Commission under Section 12. As per the Statutory Regulations, 2003, it is the statutory duty of the Universities to adopt the Guidelines issued by the UGC. The Guidelines dated 06.07.2020 cannot be ignored by terming it as non- statutory or advisory.(4) The differentiation made in the Revised Guidelines to hold final or terminal semester examination and to give option for earlier years/intermediate semester for not holding the examination has a rational basis. The differentiation has nexus with the object to be achieved. We, thus, reject the challenge to the revised Guidelines on the ground that there is any discrimination between the students of final year/terminal semester and those of intermediate and first year.(5) The revised Guidelines also cannot be termed to violate Article 14 of the Constitution on the ground that one date, i.e., 30.09.2020 has been fixed irrespective of the conditions prevailing in individual States. The date for completion of examination was fixed throughout the country to maintain uniformity in the academic calendar.(6) The Revised Guidelines dated 06.07.2020 as well as Standard Operating Procedures for conduct of examinations circulated vide letter dated 08.07.2020 of UGC as well as O.M. dated 06.07.2020 issued by MHRD clearly shows deep concern with the health of all stakeholders, i.e., students as well as the exam functionaries. Challenge to the Guidelines on the ground of it being violative of Article 21 is repelled.(7) The expression other bodies used in opening part of the Section 12 of the UGC Act, 1956 is in reference to other bodies apart from Universities as enumerated under Section 12. The submission that other bodies as occurring in Section 12 should include State Disaster Management Authority or health experts is misconceived. Section 12 never contemplated any such expression. The revised guidelines dated 06.07.2020 are not in breach of Section 12 of 1956 Act.(8) The Disaster Management Act, 2005 empowers the State Disaster Management Authority as well as the State Government to take measures for prevention and mitigation of a disaster and the action taken by the authorities under the Disaster Management Act have been given overriding effect to achieve the purpose and object of the Act, 2005. Saving of human life has been given paramount importance under the Act, 2005. Primacy have been given to the actions and measures taken under the Act, 2005 over anything inconsistent in any other law for the time being in force.(9) The direction of the University Grants Commission in Revised Guidelines dated 06.07.2020 insofar as it directs the Universities and Colleges to complete the final year/terminal year examination by 30.09.2020 shall be overridden by any contrary decision taken by the State Disaster Management Authority or the State Government exercising power under the Disaster Management Act, 2005.(10) The State Governments or State Disaster Management Authority in exercise of power under Disaster Management Act, 2005 has no jurisdiction to take a decision that the students of final year/terminal students should be promoted on the basis of earlier year assessment and internal assessment, which decision being contrary to UGC Guidelines dated 06.07.2020 has to give way to the UGC Guidelines. The UGC Guidelines dated 06.07.2020 specifically directed to conduct the final year/ terminal semester examination which shall override such contrary decision of the State Government or SDMA.