Allahabad High Court
Satish Kumar Rai vs Union Of India And Others on 3 July, 2012
Bench: Amreshwar Pratap Sahi
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?AFR
Court No. - 58
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 62880 of 2007
Petitioner :- Satish Kumar Rai
Respondent :- Union Of India And Others
Petitioner Counsel :- Akhilesh Tripathi,A.K. Pandey,Ajit Kumar Pandey,Akhilesh Tripathi
Respondent Counsel :- Asgi,H.P. Singh,Pankaj Naqvi
Hon'ble Amreshwar Pratap Sahi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Ajay Singh for the respondent-University.
The petitioner applied for being registered as a Ph.D. Scholar in the subject of Electrical Engineering on a particular topic. He proceeded to submit his thesis which is in the language of Hindi. The University sent a communication to the petitioner through the Deputy Registrar Academic that the petitioner's thesis should be submitted in English version only.
The petitioner has challenged this communication of the University on the ground that under the ordinances framed by the University itself, Ordinance No. 6.3 permits a candidate to submit his thesis either in Hindi or in English. The ordinance referred to by the learned counsel for the petitioner is reproduced herein under:-
"6.3. The thesis submitted by the candidate shall be in Hindi or English or any other language approved by the concerned DRC."
Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the stand of the University is contrary to its own ordinances and the Departmental Research Committee or any other body does not have any authority to compel the petitioner to submit his thesis in English language. He contends that once the ordinances stand, and have not been either modified or rescinded by the competent authority, then in that event any other authority including the Departmental Research Committee or any other officer of the University cannot compel the petitioner to submit his research thesis in English language.
A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the University and along with the counter affidavit the original application form filled in by the petitioner has been filed as Annexure-CA-2. Against the column of the language in which the thesis will be written, the petitioner has undisputedly offered to submit his thesis in English language. The University, therefore, has taken a stand that even otherwise the petitioner has acquiesced by exercising his option. It is on this basis that the petitioner was allowed to pursue his research and submit his thesis. The petitioner has filed a rejoinder affidavit and it is contended that filling up of the application form does not take away the impact of the ordinance referred to hereinabove and that the University cannot bind the petitioner to submit the thesis in English version.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties, there is no doubt that the option to submit a thesis under the ordinances is either in Hindi or English as indicated therein and quoted hereinabove. There is a further rider in the said ordinance which also deserves to be noticed and which states that the thesis can be submitted in any other language by the concerned Departmental Research Committee. The Departmental Research Committee has therefore been given the discretion to allow a candidate to submit his thesis in any other language apart from Hindi or English.
In the instant case the admitted and undisputed position is that the petitioner himself volunteered for the submission of the thesis in English language only. The petitioner therefore cannot be said to have done this without any knowledge of the said ordinances. The moving of a subsequent application for change of option therefore remains out of question unless the petitioner had opted for any other language other than Hindi or English. The application could have been considered had it been for any other language apart from Hindi or English.
Accordingly, in the opinion of the Court, the petitioner himself has acquiesced by exercising his option of submitting the thesis in English. Had the petitioner opted any other language including Hindi then the Departmental Research Committee could have indicated its mind as to the availability of a research guide or a thesis expert or an examiner in the subject of Hindi in a technical subject like Electrical Engineering. This aspect has to be considered by the University before a candidate is accepted and admitted for research work. This is necessary as it is quite possible that research guides or examiners may not be available who may be conversant with the language of Hindi in such a technical subject.
The petitioner having himself exercised the option of English, cannot be permitted to turn around and then say that he has a right to submit his thesis in Hindi only. The University proceeded to allow the petitioner to pursue his research only after such an option was openly exercised by the petitioner. The University is under no subsequent obligation to allow the petitioner to change his option midway.
The writ petition is misconceived and is accordingly dismissed.
Order Date :- 3.7.2012
Sahu
Civil Misc. Amendment Application No. 361618 of 2010
In
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 62880 of 2007
Petitioner :- Satish Kumar Rai
Respondent :- Union Of India And Others
Petitioner Counsel :- Akhilesh Tripathi,A.K. Pandey,Ajit Kumar Pandey,Akhilesh Tripathi
Respondent Counsel :- Asgi,H.P. Singh,Pankaj Naqvi
Hon'ble Amreshwar Pratap Sahi,J.
In view of the fact that the writ petition has been dismissed today, there is no occasion to allow the amendment application.
It is accordingly rejected.
Order Date :- 3.7.2012
Sahu
