NOTE FOR ENGINEERS

 

Consulting Engineers Association of India (CEAI)

Indian Association of Structural Engineers (IAStructE)

Association of Consulting Civil Engineers (India) (ACCE(I))

Engineering Council of India (ECI)

 

Dear Fellow Engineers,

Your attention is drawn to some of the happenings on account of the actions initiated by the Council of Architecture (COA) which are restrictive in nature and infringe and violate the fundamental rights guaranteed to all citizens of India by the Constitution vide Article 19.

CEAI took the lead in its Governing Council Meeting held on 31st May 2013 in New Delhi to discuss the Public Notice dated 20th May 2013 issued by the Council of Architecture. Mr. Subash C Mehrotra, President, Indian Association of Structural Engineers (IAStructE) who is also a Governing Council Member of CEAI was also present. Dr. Uddesh Kohli, Chairman, Engineering Council of India (ECI) was also invited to the meeting. In that and subsequent meetings of the representatives of the associations, it was noted that the Public Notice dated 20-05-2013 by the COA sought to mislead by making assertions which sought to misguide and that the COA, by an illegal exercise of power, attempted to overreach the proceedings sub judice before the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in W.P.(C) No. 934 of 2012. It was also noted that the COA’s notice asserts an erroneous interpretation of the Architects Act, 1972. The Association of Consulting Civil Engineers (India) [ACCE(I)] also joined later on when apprised of the matter. The Institution of Engineers (India) was also apprised and they agreed to the approach adopted and were also represented in the Press Conference held on 12th September 2013. The Press Release is attached at ANNEXURE A.

It was therefore decided in the meetings of the representatives of the associations that action be initiated to issue a legal notice to the Council of Architecture, hold a Press Meet and send representation to the concerned Ministries – viz. Ministry of Corporate Affairs and Ministry of Human Resource Development with copies to the Ministry of Law and Justice. It was also decided that legal proceedings be initiated or that the association implead in existing court cases. In order to meet the expenses for all these the associations and some organisations contributed the initial funds to get the action started.

To put the matter in its correct perspective, the findings of the associations and based on legal opinions received, the issues are explained hereinafter.

The relevant parts of Article 19 of the Constitution of India, are reproduced below for ready reference.

Right to Freedom

19 (1) All citizens shall have the right-

(g)to practice any profession, or carry on any occupation, trade or business,

which is to be read along with

(6) Nothing in sub-clause (g) of the said clause shall affect the operation of any existing law in so far as it imposes, or prevent the State from making any law imposing, in the interests of the general public, reasonable restrictions on the exercise of the right conferred by the said sub-clause, and, in particular, nothing in the said sub-clause shall affect the operation of any existing law in so far as it relates to, or prevent the State from making any law relating to, –

  • the professional or technical qualifications necessary for practising any profession or carrying on any occupation, trade or business, or
  • the carrying on by the State, or by a corporation owned or controlled by the State, or any trade, business, industry or service, whether to the exclusion, complete or partial, of citizens or otherwise.

The Council of Architecture have been misinterpreting and misrepresenting the Architects Act, 1972 although the various High Courts have repeatedly held that the Architects Act, 1972 is “An Act to provide for the registration of architects and for matters connected therewith”; that it merely regulates the use of title of ‘architect’, which applies only to a person registered under the said Act.

In the Statement of Objects and Reasons of the Architects Act, 1972, para 3 clearly states:

“The legislation protects the title ‘architect’ but does not make the design, supervision and construction of buildings as an exclusive responsibility of architects. Other professionals like engineers will be free to engage themselves in their normal vocation in respect of building construction works provided that they do not style themselves as architects”.

The High Courts have further held that

whereas unlike statutory enactments regarding Advocates, Chartered Accountants, Company Secretaries, etc. which restrict there under, the Architects Act does not restrict practice of design, construction and supervision of buildings to Architects registered under the said Act”.

The Hon’ble Bombay High Court had held,

“In the above circumstances we are not inclined to accept the case of the petitioners that the Architects Act restricts practice of architect to persons registered under the said Act. Therefore qualified engineers who cannot themselves call as Architects may still be free to do the work which is ordinarily done by the Architects and it would be open for the Corporations to regulate licensing in favour of such qualified engineers.”

(Writ Petition No. 4692 of 1990 – The Indian Institute of Architects v/s Pimpri Chinchwad Municipal Corporation and another).

Some more court judgments were given in CEAI’s ViewPoint of December 2013 which are reproduced in Annexure A.

In one of their moves, the Council of Architecture had issued a Public Notice dated 20thMay 2013 (copy enclosed for ready reference) which once again harps on the same.

To clarify the correct position in this behalf it is reiterated that the Architects Act, 1972 was enacted merely to provide for the registration of architects and for matters connected therewith. The said Act does not in any manner purport to control or regulate or even define the profession of architects. Unlike the statutes that regulate other professions like the Advocates Act, 1961, the Chartered Accountants Act 1949, the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956, etc., the Architects Act 1972 does not contain any prohibition or restriction against a person not registered as an architect providing services like planning, designing of buildings, drawings, supervision, etc. The practice of architecture is not restricted to registered architects under the Architects Act, 1972. What is prohibited is only the use of the title ‘architect’ and practice in the style of ‘architect’.

Even the National Building Code of India, 2005 issued by the Bureau of Indian Standards recognizes this fact whilst setting out the qualification and competency requirements of professionals like architects, engineers, structural engineers, supervisors, town planners, landscape architects, urban designers, engineers for utility services, etc.

Thus, the practice of architecture by any person is not prohibited by the Architects Act. Consequently, it is not necessary for any limited company or LLP to remove from its objects in its Memorandum of Association any clauses which show the object or intent to practice architecture. In fact the Architects Act does not even attempt to define the work or practice of architecture. However, this would cover activities like planning, designing and drawing. All these activities can be carried out by persons other than registered architects, if they are otherwise qualified and competent to do so.

Any criminal prosecution against the limited companies or LLPs for retaining the object clauses providing for the object or purpose of carrying out architectural services like planning, designing, drawing, etc. as threatened in the said public notice, will be clearly without any legal basis or would amount to abuse of process of law. Again contrary to what is stated in the public notice, a foreign architect or consultant not registered with COA can be appointed for architectural works with the prior permission of the Central Government. The only prohibition being that such foreign architect or consultant cannot use the title and style of ‘architect’ in India.

CEAI is in constant communication with other associations representing engineers to take this mater head on and once and for all put an end to the malicious intents and dictates of the COA. For this your association has requisitioned necessary legal assistance and has been engaged in issuing legal notices, sending representations to Ministries to put the facts before the authorities, filing and impleading in existing court cases filed by others.

The actions taken so far by the associations are tabulated as Annexure-B.

In the interest of safety, health and well being of the society and the environment, engineers are advised to counsel the project owners (the main client):

  1. To appoint only qualified and competent engineers for the planning, design and execution of their buildings and other projects.
  2. That Engineers should be appointed directly by the client and not through an ‘architect’ since that leads to subjugation of the engineering requirements. The independence to take decisions is necessary and imperative for the safety, stability and robustness of the structure and the systems. The whims and fancies of an ‘architect’ cannot decide those requirements since they may not always understand their implications.

To take up the issues with full force for the rights of the engineering fraternity SOLIDARITY is essential and so are FUNDS.

Please send in your contribution to CEAI.

The contribution by you and the expenses incurred by CEAI for these are exempt from IT.

 

Issued by Associations and Institutions

representing the interests of the professional engineers

 

Cheque/Bank Draft drawn in favour of “Consulting Engineers Association of India” and payable at New Delhi or sent via Bank transfer as per details given below:

 

Account Number : 50100033126466

Name of Bank :     HDFC Bank

Branch Address :50 Musoodpur, Main Road, VasantKunj, New Delhi 110070

Branch Code :0679

MICR Code :110240097

SWIFT Code :HDFCH0000679

IFSC Code :HDFC0000679

 

 

Court Judgments 

A list of some Court Judgments with regards to CoA matters are listed below:

Hon’ble Mr Justice Manmohan Judgment – Petitioner Sudhir Vohra

Hon’ble Mr Justice A M Khanwilkar Judgement- Petitioner ACE Bhopal Unit

Hon’ble Mr Chief Justice Rajiv Sahai Endlaw Judgement – Petioner COA

Hon’ble Mr Chief Justice  Pradeep Nandrajog Judgement – Appellant COA – Respondents Permendra Raj Mehta and ORS

Hon’ble Mr Justice V K Jain Judgement – Petitioner Permendra Raj Mehta and ORS – Respondent NBCC and ORS

Hon’ble Mr Justice Vipin Sanghai Judgement – Petitioner Sudhir Vohra – Respondent Registrar of Companies and ORS

Hon’ble Judges Mr A P Shah and Mr S C Dharmadhikari Judgement -Appellant IIA – Respondent Pimpri Chinchwad Mun Corpn

Hon’ble Judges Mr G F Cuto and Mr G D Kamat Judgement – Appellants Smt Meghana AP Desai and Mr Vikas Desai

Hon’ble Mr Justice B N Kirpal Judgement – Petitioner MCD

 

 

 

 

Member Connect

Member Directory

CEAI-member-directory