Engineering aspirants can now apply through state CET cell for admission under institutional quota
Engineering aspirants seeking admission under the 20% institutional quota in Maharashtra can now apply through the Common Admission Process (CAP) conducted by the state CET Cell. While colleges will retain the right to issue their own merit lists, this new option aims to give students an alternative to apply if direct applications to colleges is not possible due to any reason.
With MHT-CET results out, engineering admissions in Maharashtra are expected to start soon. The Higher and Technical Education Department announced revised rules on Friday.
The government has already declared clear eligibility criteria for NRI candidates—who will occupy 5% of institutional quota seats. Additionally, colleges are already informed about fee-related guidelines for these seats. They charge up to three times the regular fees for management quota seats and five times more for NRI quota seats. All this streamlining is expected to bring greater transparency to engineering admissions, including those under institutional quota.
The notification declaring amendment to the Maharashtra Unaided Private Professional Educational Institutions (Regulation of Admission to the Full Time Professional Undergraduate, Post Graduate, Integrated or Dual Degree Technical Courses) states, 'in case candidate is unable to submit the application directly to the institution concerned for any reason, the candidate shall have the opportunity to apply through the website of the Competent Authority till the date of allotment of final CAP Round. These applications will be forwarded to the respective institutions after the allotment process of CAP Round-IV. The concerned institution shall consider such applications while preparing the Inter-Se-Merit.'
Traditionally, 80% of engineering seats are filled through CAP, with the remaining 20% filled by colleges under the institutional quota. As per information shared by the Directorate of Technical Education (DTE), while this process remains unchanged, students now have the CAP portal as an optional route for institutional quota applications.
Director of DTE, Vinod Mohitkar, said, 'There is absolutely no intrusion on admissions done at the institutional level. We are only providing an optional platform for students to apply for those seats. This is only because we would receive random complaints from students that certain institutes are not taking their application of admission under institutional quota. In such cases they will have another option to apply. These applications will be sent to colleges to consider while declaring merit list.'
Another significant change is the introduction of a fourth CAP round, as opposed to established practice of three CAP rounds. This is expected to allow students one additional chance to secure admission through CAP before the institutional round begins. Furthermore, there will be stricter rules for admission confirmation. Previously, confirmation was only mandatory if candidates were allotted their first-choice college. Now, in Round 2, confirmation is required if the allotted college is among the top three choices, and in Round 3, if it is among the top six.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
14 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
Students & parents advised to be careful during admission season
With the admission season having started, several parents across Maharashtra are finding themselves caught in a web of fraudulent agents promising guaranteed seats in prestigious professional colleges under the management quota. In the past two months alone, at least three to four such cases have occurred raising concerns over the transparency of the admission process in private and deemed universities. Many students with average academic marks, along with their parents, attempt to secure seats in reputed institutions through alternative routes. (HT) Despite recent amendments to the Maharashtra Unaided Private Professional Educational Institutions (Regulation of Admissions and Fees) Act, which mandate a transparent admission process for management quota seats in professional courses such as engineering, pharmacy, MBA, MCA, and architecture, the situation on the ground is anything but. While affiliated colleges are required to follow stricter norms, private and deemed universities have been granted complete autonomy which grants agents access to thrive. A parent told Hindustan Times on condition of anonymity, 'I came across an agent through a Prime Shiksha advertisement on social media. When I contacted them, they asked me to visit their office at Agarwal Business Park in Kharadi. The agent's name was Deepak Agarwal, and two others Vineet and Shivam Sharma. They initially asked ₹ 13 lakh for admission to engineering at PICT through the NRI and institute quota. After some discussion, the deal was fixed at ₹ 12 lakh. We even visited the college and filled out a form and I paid them ₹ 12 lakh. They told us that the college would send an admission confirmation through email. However, when I tried to contact them the next day, their phones were switched off, and the office was locked. My son scored 92% which is quite good. I want to warn other parents; please don't fall for such agents.' Responding to this, Kalpesh Yadav, joint secretary of Yuva Sena, said, 'The criteria for management quota admissions is that they should be carried out based on merit. Last year, we successfully completed the admission of 383 students purely on merit, without taking a single rupee and we are also raising voice against it.' Cities like Pune and Nashik, which host some of the state's top institutions, are witnessing a surge in demand for management quota seats. Many students with average academic marks, along with their parents, attempt to secure seats in reputed institutions through alternative routes. In doing so, they often rely on admission agents, many of whom turn out to be fraudsters. In Pune, at least three to four such fraud cases have surfaced in the last year, with parents reportedly losing lakhs of rupees. The agents exploit the urgency and emotional vulnerability of families keen on securing their child's academic future. As a result, many institutes and government officials are urging families to avoid falling for promises of guaranteed admissions. Several institutions have started issuing public advisories, warning against dealing with unverified agents. To address the rising number of complaints, support groups such as the Innovation Foundation and Yuva Sena have set up helplines for students and parents facing admission-related issues. 'Last year, we helped several students who had been defrauded by these agents. This year, too, our helpline is open to assist anyone in need,' said Kalpesh Yadav, joint secretary of Yuva Sena. The helpline number for assistance is 9623337777.
News18
a day ago
- News18
Shattered Hope: Bangladesh & The Unfinished Dream Of Freedom
Sain G.M. Syed laid the ideological foundation for a separate Sindhi state as early as 1971, inspired by the liberation of Bangladesh (then East Pakistan). His dream, and ultimately mine, was to break free from the theocratic and militarised state of Pakistan—a nation that has been consistently dominated by the Pakistan Army and manipulated by jihadi Islamist groups. The freedom of Bangladesh was not just a geopolitical event; it was a torch of hope for us in Sindh. When I read about the sacrifices and courage of the Bangladeshi people, and about the leadership of Shaikh Mujibur Rahman, it stirred something deep within me. Mujib was not only the architect of Bangladesh's independence, but also a friend of Sain G.M. Syed. He even visited Sindh on our leader's invitation—a visit that symbolized the solidarity of two oppressed nations under the yoke of an unjust state. It was Bangladesh's liberation—with the vital support of India—that inspired me to engage in student politics. It wasn't about power, popularity, or personal gain. It was about a cause larger than life: the right to self-determination, the dream of a secular, democratic, and peaceful Sindhudesh. For decades, I believed that Bangladesh was a successful example of that dream, proof that resistance could triumph against oppression. Years later, I found myself in exile in America. My first international media interview took place in Houston, Texas, during the 'Howdy Modi' event. There, I told India TV that we had come not only to welcome the Indian Prime Minister, Narendra Modi, but to appeal to him. As the leader of the world's largest democracy, and as a neighbour with a shared history of resistance to extremism, we looked to India for help—just as it had helped the Bengali people in 1971. We believed that India would also stand with Sindh. But those hopes have been painfully shattered in recent years. A tragic reversal has taken place in Bangladesh—one that breaks the heart of any freedom lover. In 2024, forces backed by Pakistan's notorious Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), along with Islamist groups like Jamaat-e-Islami and quiet support from some Western powers, orchestrated a political upheaval. The secular, pro-India government of Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina—daughter of Shaikh Mujibur Rahman—was pushed out. She was forced into exile, ending a decade-long era of remarkable economic growth and relative stability. Under Hasina's leadership, Bangladesh had become one of the fastest-growing economies in the world. Despite starting from a position of poverty and devastation, she steered her country past Pakistan, whose economy continues to survive on international bailouts and military patronage. Bangladesh under Hasina was a beacon for us. It proved that post-colonial states could chart an independent, secular, and economically prosperous path. But now, the nightmare has returned. The streets of Dhaka and Chittagong echo once more with the chants of Islamist slogans. ISI-backed operatives walk freely in government circles. Even China, with its expanding influence and authoritarian leanings, has found a new base of operations in Bangladesh. What was once a story of hope is now marred by fear and regression. Advertisement How did this happen? Why did this happen? And who is to blame? These are the questions that haunt me. I've spoken with scholars, activists, and intellectuals from Bangladesh and around the world. The consensus is sobering: we are all responsible. Not just the political actors within Bangladesh, but also those outside who failed to protect democracy and secularism. To me, however, this is also a story of unfinished business. When India helped liberate Bangladesh in 1971, it only cut off one finger from the cancerous hand of Pakistan. The rest of the hand—Punjab-dominated military, religious extremism, and jihadist networks—was left untouched. That cancer continued to spread, metastasizing through Kashmir, Balochistan, Sindh, and even within Pakistan itself. The strategic mistake was stopping short of a full disintegration of Pakistan. Time and again, I have heard the argument that a further Balkanization of Pakistan would have created more unstable and hostile neighbors for India. But history tells us otherwise. The real danger lies in leaving a militarized and extremist state intact. If Pakistan had been fully dismantled in 1971, and its constituent oppressed nations like Balochistan, Sindh, and Pashtunistan were allowed self-rule, we would not be facing the security threats we see today—from proxy wars to cross-border terrorism. advetisement India invested over $7 billion in Bangladesh in recent years. It built roads, ports, and power stations. It signed defense and trade agreements. It even supported counter-terrorism efforts. And yet, all of this progress was undone not just by local forces but by a combination of geopolitical negligence and short-term diplomacy. This should be a wake-up call—not just for India, but for all democracies in the region. There is still time to act. Bangladesh can be saved from falling back into the abyss. But that will require renewed commitment from democratic nations, including India, to support the people of Bangladesh—not just its governments. The legacy of Sheikh Mujib must not be buried under the rubble of Islamist revivalism. Similarly, the dream of Sindhudesh, Balochistan, and a free Pashtun land must be revived with the same passion and vision that brought Bangladesh its freedom. Our hopes may be shattered, but our spirit is not. For those of us who were inspired by Bangladesh's fight for independence, we must continue to resist the forces of oppression and religious extremism. History has shown us that no tyranny lasts forever. But justice, like freedom, must be demanded—and sometimes, fought for. advetisement
Deccan Herald
a day ago
- Deccan Herald
Five petitioners write Open Letter to CJI Gavai, urge early deadline for restoration of J&K's statehood
New Delhi: Five petitioners in the Article 370 case have shot off an open letter to Chief Justice of India B R Gavai urging him to constitute a bench to hear petitions on the unconstitutionality on the removal of Jammu and Kashmir's statehood, an early deadline for its restoration and ensuring that no government in future abrogate statehoods. They said they are 'concerned' that the government might cite the Pahalgam attack to again delay the restoration of statehood, which has been promised repeatedly by Union Home Minister Amit Shah in Parliament. They wanted the Chief Justice to take suo-motu cognizance of the Open Letter and constitute a bench to decide on the petitioners - former Group of Interlocutors for Jammu and Kashmir Radhakumar, former Home Secretary G K Pillai, Major General Ashok K Mehtra (retired), Air Vice-Marshal Kapil Kak (retired) and former Secretary Inter-State Council of India Amitabha Pande - will also be urging MPs across to take up the issue in the upcoming Monsoon Session of Parliament.'Not only is that argument (Pahalgam) not tenable, it can be argued that this is exactly the time to do so. The high turnout in the October 2024 elections with no violence, and the absolute majority the electors gave the National Conference…indicated the people had voted for an elected administration with the strength to govern according to public aspirations,' they the way Kashmiris responded to the Pahalgam attack, they said in the Open Letter that the NIA investigations have now found out that the earlier police version that Kashmiris were involved in the terror attack is "unfounded". In an apparent reference to actions like demolishing houses of families of terrorists, they said LG Manoj Sinha administration's 'haste in unjustified punitive action' has caused a great deal of anger on the ground and this has been exacerbated by the sidelining of the elected administration and assembly from security consultations and initiatives for redress. .'The post-Pahalgam environment, which was widely conducive to the re-establishment of peace, is already being vitiated. The most effective bulwark against such vitiation is restoration of civil and political rights, including oversight institutions, that will come with statehood,' they Assembly passed a resolution and eight months have passed since Lieutenant-Governor Manoj Sinha forwarded it to the President, they said adding, no action has been taken, despite repeated requests by the Chief said the government's repeated assurances on restoring statehood suggest a tacit recognition that the removal of statehood is unconstitutional. They also objected to the Solicitor-General's contention in December 2023 that statehood would only be restored in stages. 'This is a policy that nullifies the constitutional issue that no state can be demoted to a Union Territory in its entirety. If that demotion was unconstitutional, then it follows that statehood must be restored in toto," they said while warning that all states will be at risk of similar actions being taken against them following the Solicitor General's laid out letter said it was the first time in independent India that an existing state had been demoted to Union Territory. They had argued in the court that this contravened the Constitution and the basic structure doctrine that India is a federal democracy in which states' rights must be petitioners recalled that the Supreme Court had not ruled on the constitutionality or unconstitutionality of the Union government move because the Solicitor-General had assured it that statehood would be restored at an appropriate time. Then Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud urged the government to restore statehood at the earliest while Justice Sanjay Khanna separately had held it unconstitutional.
