Supreme Court tells UGC, regulators to warn public about fake colleges after Etah case

The Supreme Court has directed the University Grants Commission (UGC) and all other education regulators to issue public advisories warning students, parents and the public not to take admission in, or deal with, any educational institution without first checking that it is genuine. The direction came in an order dated Friday, October 9, 2026, from a bench of Justices Ahsanuddin Amanullah and N.V. Anjaria, after the court was told about a purported medical college allegedly run from a run-down farmhouse in Mahmoodpur Nagaria village in Etah district, Uttar Pradesh. The court also asked the Union government to monitor whether the regulators comply. The order was passed in a wider case on private universities, Ayesha Jain v. Amity University, Noida and others.

Every admission season, students in India lose money and years to institutions that look official on paper but have no valid approval. The Etah case, as described to the court, shows how far this can go: a list of health courses, from pharmacy and nursing to Ayurveda, offered by an outfit operating from a few rooms in a field. Health courses carry special risk, because a degree from an unrecognised institution can block a student from registration and licensed practice, and because patients ultimately depend on those qualifications being real.

The direction shifts part of the burden to regulators. Until now, checking whether a college or university is approved has largely been left to families, many of whom do not know which body approves which course. A public advisory from the UGC and other regulators is meant to make that check routine and to tell people where to look. The court's request that the Centre monitor compliance gives the order more weight than a one-off warning.

The case itself has grown well beyond its start. It began as a petition against Amity University, Noida, and the court has since widened it into an examination of how private universities across the country are run. In earlier orders in the same case, the court directed the Centre, states and Union Territories to gather details of private universities' finances, admissions, fees, use of surplus funds, staff recruitment and grievance systems. The Etah episode adds a sharper problem to that review: not only how recognised private institutions behave, but how unrecognised ones manage to operate at all.

Short-term: The UGC and other regulators now have to publish advisories urging people to verify institutions before admission, and the Centre has to keep track of whether they do so. Students currently choosing colleges, especially for nursing, pharmacy and allied health courses, should check approvals before paying fees.

Long-term: If the advisories are followed by regular, easy-to-search public lists and active policing, fake institutions will find it harder to attract students. The wider private-university review in the same case could also lead to tighter rules on how private institutions are run and disclosed.

Who is affected: Students and parents, particularly in smaller towns where fake institutions target families; the UGC and other education regulators; state governments; and genuine private colleges, which gain from clearer public checks.

Questions and Answers