3.5 Clause (d): Member
The section 2(d) defines who counts as a member of the University Grants Commission. It clarifies that when the Act mentions a member, it is not just talking about the ordinary participants. It specifically includes the two top leaders: the Chairman and the Vice-Chairman. This definition ensures that any rules, duties, or powers given to a member also legally apply to the person leading the meetings and the person standing in for them. Section 2(d) is essential because it identifies the human beings who have the legal authority to run the UGC. It connects directly to how the Commission is built and how it functions.
Section 5 details exactly who makes up the Commission. It specifies that there shall be a Chairman, a Vice-Chairman, ten other members appointed by the Central Government. Section 2(d) acts as the legal glue that groups all these individuals under the single umbrella term member for the rest of the Act. The Act sets out rules for how long someone can stay in their position and what happens if they resign. Because of the definition in 2(d), the term limits and removal processes described in Section 6 apply to the Chairman and Vice-Chairman just as they do to any other appointee, unless a specific distinction is made.
Decisions in the UGC are made during meetings. Section 7 describes how these meetings are conducted and how many people must be present. By defining the Chairman and Vice-Chairman as members u/s 2(d), the Act ensures their presence counts toward the official headcount needed to make legal decisions. The provision of Section 8 states that even if there is a vacancy among the members, the Commission’s work remains valid. Section 2(d) ensures that this protection applies regardless of whether the empty seat belongs to the Chairman, the Vice-Chairman, or an ordinary member.
3.6 Clause (e): Prescribed
The word “prescribed” is a legal pointer. Whenever you see this word in the UGC Act, it means the details or the “how-to” of a specific task aren’t written directly in the main law. Instead, those details are found in the official Rules created by the Government to support the Act. In simple words an “Act” is a high-level manual to operate UGC, and rules are the detailed handbook, framed for detailed working of the authority to achieve the goals of the Act.
When the Act says something must be done in a “prescribed” way, it is telling you to look at the handbook for the specific forms, deadlines, or step-by-step instructions. Section 2(e) is a bridge between the broad powers of the Act and the practical, day-to-day administration of the Commission. It connects directly to how the law is actually put into practice. Section 25 gives the Central Government the authority to create the Rules. Since Section 2(e) defines “prescribed” as being based on these rules, Section 25 is essentially the factory where all “prescribed” procedures are manufactured. This includes rules for terms of office and conditions of service for members, the manner in which the Commission’s funds are shared, the form and time for submitting annual reports, etc.
The Act says members shall serve for a certain period and receive such salary as may be “prescribed.” Because of Section 2(e), we know this means the Government must pass a specific set of Rules to decide the exact salary and benefits, rather than having to change the whole Act every time there is a cost-of-living adjustment. The Act requires the Commission to submit an annual report in such form and at such time as may be “prescribed.” This means the UGC cannot just send a random letter; they must follow the specific layout and timeline defined in the Rules established under the authority of Section 25. The significance of this definition is that it allows the UGC Act to remain stable. The Parliament passes the Act, but the Government can update the “prescribed” details through notifications as times change, without needing to go back to Parliament for a full legislative amendment every time a form needs a new text box.
3.7 Clause (f): University
As per UGC Act Deemed Universities and other Universities as defined under Section 2(f) are same and there is no difference between the two.[1] The definition of university and provisions in s. 23 of the Act refer to Acts of the Central, Provincial or the State legislatures by which one or more universities are established or incorporated and not to institutions incorporated under a general statue providing for incorporation.[2] It is necessary to read the expression “established or incorporated” in this Section as “established and incorporated” insofar as private and deemed universities are concerned. Therefore it is only after establishment of the basic requisites of a university such as classrooms, library, laboratory, offices and hostel facility, etc. that private universities should be incorporated and conferred a juristic personality.[3]
The words “established” or “incorporated” referred to Acts under which universities are established or incorporated. Several universities in this country have been either established or incorporated under special statutes, such as the Delhi University Act, the Banaras Hindu University Act, the Allahabad University Act etc. In these cases, there is a special Act either of the Central or the Provincial or the State Legislatures establishing and incorporating the particular universities. There is also another pattern, where under one compendious Act several universities are either established or incorporated, for instance, the Madhya Pradesh Universities Act, 1973. The definition of university refer to Acts of the Central, Provincial or the State Legislatures by which one or more universities are established or incorporated and not to institutions incorporated under a general statute providing for incorporation.[4]
State Private Universities are established and officially notified by the concerned state government through an Act of the State Legislature. These universities, once established and notified by the State Governments, are included in the list of universities maintained by the UGC under Section 2(f) of the UGC Act, 1956. It is mandatory for all such universities to adhere to UGC regulations and guidelines issued periodically to maintain standards in higher education. Colleges recognized under Section 2(f) of the UGC Act 1956 are eligible for central assistance. This section ensure that colleges meet certain standards of academic and infrastructural quality, allowing them to receive financial grants for development projects, research activities, and capacity building.[5]
3.8 Critical Analysis
Procedural Delay: The definition of University under Section 2(f) includes institutions recognized by the Commission in consultation with the University concerned. The Act does not prescribe a statutory timeline for this consultation. In practice, as seen in UGC (Fitness of Institutions for Grants) Rules, 1975 for Section 2(f), the process involves multiple stages of verification and correspondence between the UGC and state/central universities. This creates a regulatory “waiting room” where institutions are established by law but cannot function fully until the UGC completes its internal processing.
Ultra Vires with the Constitution: The definitions generally fall within the Union’s power under Entry 66 of List I (Coordination and determination of standards). However, Section 2(b), defining executive authority, can occasionally clash with Article 30.If the UGC uses its definition of executive authority to mandate specific administrative structures that override a minority institution’s chosen management, it may be held ultra vires. It had been held that enactment by a legislative statute will automatically lead to the extinguishment of minority character of an institution, if the context about the minority community surrounding the creation of the institution and its management are clearly established to stem from a strong advocacy for the interest of the minority community.[6]
The status of minority is one more aspect of research. Unfortunately we are having vague definition of minority status of any community. The aspect of linguistic minority are clear up to certain level. Religious minority are declared on the basis of religion and there is no assessment done after this declaration on the basis of percentage of population. We must have clear mathematical definition of minority status of any kind of community which shall not exceed 5% of the total population in that particular area. States may be empowered to give minority status to a community under their respective jurisdictions, so that goal of this concept is fulfilled and actual protection is given to those who are less in population.
Colonial Era Policy Irrelevance: The UGC Act was modeled on mid-20th-century British administrative frameworks, emphasizing a centralized, state-controlled definition of education. The “incorporation-only” model u/s 2(f) is a legacy of colonial-era distrust of private education. In the 21st century, this is arguably irrelevant as it fails to account for modern educational formats like purely digital universities, skill-based clusters, or international branch campuses that operate under different governance models but provide equivalent standards.
Room for Misinterpretation: Section 2(b) and 2(e) contain phrases that are frequently litigated due to their broad or circular nature.
Executive Authority (Section 2b): The phrase by whatever name called creates ambiguity in modern multi-tier governance (e.g., where a Board of Governors, a Senate, and a Vice-Chancellor share power).
Prescribed (Section 2e): This is defined as rules made under this Act. However, the UGC often regulates through Regulations enacted under Section 26 or circulars. Courts have had to intervene to clarify when these “prescribed” norms are mandatory versus recommendatory for state-run universities.[7]
[1] Karamjeet Kaur vs State Of Punjab & Another; Punjab-Haryana High Court – CWP No.11049 of 2017
[2] Prem Chand Jain & Anr vs R. K. Chhabra [1984 CHANDLR(CIV&CRI) 265]
[3] Sarvoday Kelavni Samaj vs State Of Gujarat [AIR 2016 (NOC) 243 (GUJ.)]
[4] Sikkim Manipal University vs Indira Gandhi National Open University [AIR 2016 (NOC) 155 (SIK.)]
[5] Annual Report 2023-24, University Grants Commission, 2024
[6] Aligarh Muslim University v Naresh Agarwal & Ors [2024 INSC 856]
[7] Kalyani Mathivanan vs K V Keyaraj And Ors [AIR 2015 SUPREME COURT 1875]
![Master Guide to NTA UGC NET Paper-1 [UGC NET, SET, JRF, and Ph.D]...](https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/61jHtJMSoVL.jpg)
