Viplav Sharma had filed a writ petition before the Supreme Court in 2006, seeking regulation of the entry of foreign universities and the de-recognition of 44 deemed universities.  The petition was pending for the last 3 years since the Government wanted to bring a comprehensive change in the higher education sector. The Government had appointed a high-level committee chaired by Prof. P.N Tandon.

In October 2009, the Tandon Committee submitted its report recommending de-recognition to 44 deemed Universities. Earlier this month, the Union Minister for Human Resource Development, Kapil Sibal announced the National Commission for Higher Education and Research (NCHER) Bill to scrap the concept of deemed universities. This announcement sparked a debate on the legality of deemed universities apart from raising concern for the students of those deemed universities. 

The Government had assured that the students would not be affected, as these deemed universities would be re-affiliated to their mother universities from whom they acquired the 'deemed university' status. Under pressure from students, institutions, parents and political parties, the Government asked the Tandon Committee to also draw up a road map to safeguard the student's interests. The Financial Express, a financial daily, reported that the 44 institutes with students across 13 states, have a total of 1.2 lakh undergraduate and postgraduate students, in addition to 2,124 pursuing their M.Phil and Ph.D programmes and an estimated 74,808 pursuing distance education programmes.

Of the 130 universities that have been granted a 'deemed university' status by the Universities Grants Commission (UGC), all universities excepting 38, are average says sources. With confusion existing on whether the remainder institutions are to continue as deemed universities has resulted in several intervening applications being filed in the writ petition filed by Viplav Sharma.

The Division Bench of the Supreme Court comprising Justices Dalveer Bhandari and A.K. Patnaik saw a line of prominent Senior Counsels. Appearing for the affected deemed Universities were Fali Nariman, K. Parasaran, P.P. Rao, K.K. Venugopal, Dushyant Dave, Rajiv Dhavan and Abhishek Manu Singhvi. Defending the Government was Attorney General, Ghoolam Vahanavati. Solicitor General, Gopal Subramaniam has been involved in this matter ever since his Additional Solicitor General days, and is being assisted by Aman Ahluwalia.

The court witnessed heated arguments between the Attorney General and Dushyant Dave. The Bench reacted to bickering between the Attorney General and Dave, "You are senior counsel, please behave yourselves. There has to be a limit. Don't test our patience." A Supreme Court lawyer, on the condition of anonymity said, "These comments are normal in any high value litigation. When several Senior Counsels gather, these exchanges are expected." Fali Nariman argued on how the government can readily accept the Tandon Committee report without giving them a chance to be heard.

Fox Mandal is defending the Allahabad Agricultural University, although it is not among the 44. Fox Mandal's team, led by Partner Sangeeta Mandal is assisted by Senior Associate Swati Sinha. Sangeeta Mandal had briefed Senior Counsel Gaurav Banerjee. However, he was conflicted when he was appointed as the Additional Solicitor General. Mandal is now briefing several Senior Counsels including P.S. Narasimha and Arvind Kumar. Speaking to Bar & Bench, Swati Sinha said, "The Bench has been reassuring to the Respondents, and has said that it will hear each Respondent at length before any order is passed as the matter is of vital public interest."

Pratibha M. Singh, of Singh & Singh has been representing the Medical Council of India, one of the Respondents. The Petitioner, Viplav Sharma, himself a lawyer, is however represented through Sanjay Hegde with Goodwill Indeevar as the Advocate on Record.

The Supreme Court has issued an order of status-quo on the Tandon Committee recommendations. Attorney General has sought two weeks to place the report of the Tandon Committee before the Supreme Court.