’NATA unnecessary for B Arch’: AU told to pay ₹10L compensation

CHENNAI: The Madras High Court ordered Anna University to compensate a Chennai-based woman with Rs 10 lakh for rejecting her application for admission to the B.Arch course in 2017 for not clearing the National Aptitude Test in Architecture (NATA).

Justice R Subramanian passed the orders on disposing of the petition filed by V Amrutha. The petitioner sought direction to quash Clause 6 (a) (i) of the Notification of Information and Instructions for the B Arch Degree Course-2017 of Anna University. She further wanted the university to follow the notification dated June 15, 2017, of the Council of Architecture, saying that NATA is not mandatory for B.Arch admissions.

“While condemning the second respondent (Tamil Nadu Engineering Admissions, Anna University) for its outrageous and inexplicable conduct, I direct the second respondent to pay a compensation of Rs 10 lakh to the petitioner. The said compensation shall be paid within a period of four weeks from today, failing which the compensation amount will carry interest at 9% per annum from the date of the order by Justice Pushpa Sathyanarayana of Madras HC, on June 30, 2017, till the date of payment, ” the judge held.

The court passed the order not only for not following the Council of Architecture’s notification, but also for not adhering to the order of the Madras High Court. In 2017, the HC ordered Anna University to consider Amrutha’s application, citing that the council of architecture made it clear that NATA is unnecessary.

“Unfortunately, in recent days, education has not only become commercial, but has also fallen into the hands of either unqualified persons or persons who because of their educational qualification that is appended to their names become intellectually arrogant and take decisions which in fact spoil the lives of young students. The case on hand comes under the second category stated above,” the court expressed its dissatisfaction.

While imposing an additional cost of Rs 1 lakh as damages that should be paid by the university to the petitioner, the judge also lamented that the lives of youngsters are unsafe in the hands of unscrupulous academicians and executives, who preside over the very vital rights of the youngsters and decide on the policies of education.