Overview of the Case
The Federation of Self Financing Technical Institutions (FSFTI) has filed a petition with the Supreme Court contesting the mid-cycle introduction of regulations under the National Commission for Allied and Healthcare Professions (NCAHP) for the academic year 2026-27. The case, titled Federation of Self-Financing Technical Institutions vs. Union of India, raises concerns about the potential impact on approximately 20,000 students if two universities fail to provide necessary affiliations by the August 14 deadline.
Judicial Proceedings
A bench comprising Justices PS Narasimha and Alok Aradhe has issued a notice to the Central government regarding the plea, tagging it alongside related petitions. The FSFTI argues that despite the NCAHP Act being enacted in 2021, no consistent regulations have been established, leaving the sector governed by fluctuating executive circulars. As an instance, the requirement of NEET-UG for Bachelor of Physiotherapy (BPT) and Bachelor of Occupational Therapy (BOT) courses was introduced in January only to be rescinded two months later. Additionally, the land requirement for physiotherapy colleges was reduced from 10 acres to 5 acres via a corrigendum in July, conflicting with Maharashtra University of Health Sciences’ stipulation of 2 acres.
State and Institutional Challenges
The petition highlights that ten states have yet to establish functional State Allied and Healthcare Councils. Regarding affiliation issues, I K Gujral Punjab Technical University (IKGPTU) and Maharaja Ranjit Singh Punjab Technical University (MRSPTU), named as respondents, have refused to affiliate institutions offering allied and healthcare courses. They assert that such courses fall under the jurisdiction of the University Grants Commission (UGC), not the NCAHP, leaving affected institutions in a bind for the 2026-27 academic year.
Relief Sought
FSFTI seeks directives for the immediate granting of affiliations by the universities for the current session, a postponement of the new regulations to the next academic year, uniform implementation across India, and the establishment of a national student database. The petition references two similar matters previously heard by the Court, with one decision in April critiquing the delays in regulation formation as “paralysing the entire process.”
Conclusion and Representation
The Court, recognizing the urgency, has ordered the issuance of notices and the tagging of this matter with ongoing petitions. Advocate Meenesh Dubey from Dubey & Chandra Law Chambers represents the petitioners in this case.
More Read
Follow the live coverage of the Supreme Court proceedings as they delve into the implications of the NCAHP Act, 2021, for the upcoming academic session.
For more updates, stay tuned to our legal news section.
