The observations were made during the hearing of a petition filed by a student of Amity University alleging harassment after she sought a change of name in the university records.
| Photo Credit: The Hindu
The Supreme Court on Tuesday (May 19, 2026) criticised the Union Education Secretary for failing to comply with its earlier order directing the Centre to provide logistical support to a committee assisting the court in a matter concerning the audit of private universities.
A Bench of Justices Ahsanuddin Amanullah and N.V. Anjaria had earlier issued a contempt notice to Vineet Joshi, Secretary, Department of Higher Education, while hearing a matter relating to the implementation of its April 20 order directing the Centre to provide office space, stenographic assistance, and other logistical arrangements to a panel headed by former Indian Legal Service officer R.M. Sharma.
“Mr. Joshi, why did you not take this matter seriously? I did not expect this from a senior bureaucrat like you. Is this the manner in which orders of the Supreme Court are to be treated so lightly?… You have misunderstood the court and its position under the Constitution,” Justice Amanullah orally observed while addressing Mr. Joshi, who was personally present in the courtroom.
The observations were made during the hearing of a petition filed by a student of Amity University alleging harassment after she sought a change of name in the university records. The court had subsequently expanded the scope of the proceedings and issued pan-India directions asking States and Union Territories to furnish details regarding the management of private universities, wages paid to the staff, and the composition and mode of selection of the bodies administering such institutions.
The top court had appointed the Department of Higher Education as the nodal Ministry to facilitate the functioning of the committee headed by Mr. Sharma, which had been entrusted with examining affidavits filed by States, Union Territories and Central authorities on the administration and regulatory framework governing private universities. The court had specifically directed the Ministry to ensure that the panel was provided with adequate infrastructural and logistical support.
However, on May 4, Mr. Sharma apprised the Bench that the stenographer deputed to assist the committee did not possess the requisite proficiency in English and was unable to properly take dictation. In a report placed before the Bench, he further stated that a lawyer associated with the committee had assisted in typing documents, while he had arranged secretarial support through his personal resources. Taking note of the deficiencies, the court had directed Mr. Joshi to remain personally present on the subsequent date of hearing on May 18.
On Tuesday (May 19, 2026), Justice Amanullah questioned Mr. Joshi over the failure to extend logistical support to the committee.
“You did not show the seriousness, Mr. Joshi… Mr. Sharma is representing us, he is the face of the court. Is this the way he is supposed to be treated?” the judge remarked.
However, Mr. Sharma informed the Bench that pursuant to its previous order, the requisite support had since been extended and all issues had been “ironed out”.
The Bench also took on record the latest report submitted by Mr. Sharma indicating the extent of compliance by States and Union Territories with its earlier directions. It accordingly granted States and Union Territories five weeks time to file their responses.
The court further directed State governments to furnish details of the benefits extended to private universities, including land allotments, and particulars regarding the constitution of boards governing such institutions.
The Bench also requested Mr. Joshi to place before the court his recommendations concerning the establishment, management and regulation of universities functioning under various Ministries. The court directed that the recommendations be filed by way of an affidavit on or before July 10.
“We request Vineet Joshi to assist and advise the court with regard to any core issue which the court may not have noticed till now, going by his experience as Secretary to the Department of Higher Education, Government of India, for over a year now,” the Bench observed.
On November 20, 2025, the court had passed a series of directions calling for comprehensive details regarding the establishment, administration and regulatory oversight of universities operating under different Ministries. States, Union Territories and the University Grants Commission were further asked to disclose their policies governing admissions and appointments.
Published – May 19, 2026 10:22 pm IST
