Unni Krishnan, J.P. & Others vs State of Andhra Pradesh & Others (1993)

Case Summary: Unni Krishnan, J.P. & Others vs State of Andhra Pradesh & Others (1993)

(1993) 02 SC CK 0035

In The Supreme Court of India

Case No: Writ Petition (C) No. 607 of 1992 with connected petitions and appeals

Unni Krishnan, J.P. and Others (Appellant)

State of Andhra Pradesh and Others (Respondent)

Date of Decision: 04-02-1993

Bench: Full Bench

Hon'ble Judges: L.M. Sharma, C.J.; S. Ratnavel Pandian, J.; S.P. Bharucha, J.; S. Mohan, J.; B.P. Jeevan Reddy, J.

Final Decision: Overruled

Citations:

AIR 1993 SC 2178; (1993) 1 JT 474; (1993) 1 SCALE 290; (1992) 2 SCALE 703; (1993) 1 SCC 645; (1993) 1 SCR 594

[Judgment Source] https://www.courtkutchehry.com/Judgement/Search/AdvancedV2?docid=273875

Facts of the Case:

The case arose after Mohini Jain v. State of Karnataka (1992) held that the right to education is a fundamental right under Article 21. Multiple petitions challenged capitation fees in professional institutions and sought clarification on whether the right to education extends to professional degrees such as medicine and engineering. The Court examined the constitutional scope of the right to education, the legality of capitation fees, and the balance between fundamental rights and directive principles.

Law Points Raised:

1. Whether the Constitution guarantees a fundamental right to education for professional degrees under Article 21.
2. Whether citizens have a fundamental right to establish educational institutions under Article 19(1)(g).
3. Whether recognition or affiliation makes a private educational institution an instrumentality of the State.
4. Constitutionality of charging capitation fees.

Acts / Provisions / Articles Referred:

Constitution of India, 1950 — Articles 12, 14, 15, 16, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 37, 38, 39, 41, 42, 45, 46, 49, 64, 226, 256, 358, 371D.
Various State Capitation Fee Prohibition Acts (A.P., Maharashtra, Karnataka, Tamil Nadu).
University Grants Commission Act, 1956 — Sections 12A, 22, 23.
Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 — Sections 10A, 10B, 10C.
All India Council for Technical Education Act, 1987 — Sections 3, 10.

Judgements Referred:

Mohini Jain v. State of Karnataka (1992);
Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978);
ADM Jabalpur v. Shivkant Shukla (1976);
State of Bihar v. Kameshwar Singh.

Obiter Dicta:

While education is of paramount importance for national progress, the right to professional education is not an absolute fundamental right under Article 21. The State must endeavor to provide free and compulsory education at the primary level (Article 45), but higher and professional education may be regulated through a framework balancing access, merit, and economic realities.

Ratio Decidendi:

There is no fundamental right to education for a professional degree under Article 21. The right to education under Article 21 extends only to basic education until the age of 14 years as per Article 45. Beyond this, the obligation of the State is subject to its economic capacity and development needs.

Final Ruling:

The Court overruled the broad interpretation in Mohini Jain's case, holding that professional education is not covered as a fundamental right under Article 21. The State may regulate admissions and fees to prevent exploitation through capitation fees.

Relevant Paragraph Numbers:

Paras: 1-5, 6-15, 37-40, 170-175 (scope of right to education and regulation of professional institutions).

Summary:

The Unni Krishnan judgment redefined the scope of the right to education in India, limiting its enforceability under Article 21 to free and compulsory education for children up to the age of 14 years. It upheld the State's authority to regulate professional education and prohibit capitation fees, balancing individual rights with broader socio-economic considerations.