Allahabad High Court
Vaibhav Sharma vs Union Of India Thru Secy. And ... on 30 October, 2012
Bench: Arun Tandon
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?A.F.R.
Court No. - 38
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 51984 of 2012
Petitioner :- Vaibhav Sharma
Respondent :- Union Of India Thru Secy. And Others
Petitioner Counsel :- Girijesh Kumar Tripathi
Respondent Counsel :- A.S.G.I.,Anurag Khanna,Ritivik Upadhyay,Vaibhav Caushik
Hon'ble Arun Tandon,J.
Petitioner before this Court seeks quashing of the eligibility conditions as notified for admission to M. Phil Course in the brochure published by Chaudhary Charan Singh University for the purpose, insofar as it provides that in addition to at least 55% marks in the Post Graduate Degree Examination the candidate must have also achieved 50% marks at the Graduate level examination and in the Intermediate examination or minimum 55% marks at Graduate level examination with second division in Intermediate examination.
The condition is being objected to on the ground that it violates the essential requirements as provided by the U.G.C. under the U.G.C. (Minimum Standards And Procedure For Awards of M.Phil/Ph.D. Degree), Regulation, 2009.
Counsel for the petitioner has also placed reliance upon Ordinance framed by the University for admission to Doctor of Philosophy (Ph. D.) Course wherein the only requirement for being eligible for admission to the said Doctor of Philosophy Course has been provided as at least 55% marks in master's degree. He submits that Ph. D. and M.Phil are practically identical courses which are offered to the students who have passed their post graduation degree examination. Therefore, there can be no different minimum standards for being admitted to the two courses.
I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have examined the records.
It is not in dispute that in the brochure published by the University for the purpose of admission to M. Phil Course for the academic sessions to be started in 2012 it has been specifically notified that minimum requirement for being eligible to the M. Phil two Semester Course would be a master degree with 55% marks and Bachelor Degree and Intermediate Examination with at least 50% marks each or a Bachelor Degree with 55% marks and Intermediate Examination with second division marks.
Petitioner has made his application with open eyes and being fully aware that he was not eligible in accordance with the rules notified in the admission brochure, he gave an undertaking which is recorded in his provisional admit card and is to the following effect:
"I MAY BE ALLOWED TO APPEAR IN THE M.Phil. ENTRANCE TEST ON JUNE 28, 2012 AND MY CASE FOR ADMISSION MAY ONLY BE CANSIDERED PROVIED I QUALTY THE ENTRANCE TEST AND THE SEATS REMAIN VACANT DUE TO NON-AVAILIBITY OF QUALIFIED CANDIDATES AS PER THE ELIGIBILITY CANDITIONS MENTIONED IN THE UNIVERSITY INFORMATION BROCHURE-2012."
From the undertaking reproduced above, it is apparently clear that the petitioner had stated that he may be considered only if seats remain vacant due to non-availability of qualified candidates as per the eligibility conditions mentioned in the University Information Brochure-2012, referred to above. Therefore, up to that stage the petitioner was not aggrieved by the conditions which were laid down in the admission brochure and he readily accepted the same.
The petitioner does not satisfy the essential eligibility conditions as mentioned in the brochure, as he has secured only 47% marks in graduation level and 47% marks in Intermediate Examination.
In view of the aforesaid alone the candidature of the petitioner was liable to be rejected at the very outset by the University. As a matter of fact the University committed a mistake in permitting the petitioner to appear in the entrance examination provisionally. Such approach of the University cannot be approved of. The University must strictly follow the norms which are prescribed under the admission brochure. There cannot be any provisional permission to undertake the entrance examination contrary to the terms notified in the admission brochure. The University is warned to be careful in future.
So far as the petitioner is concerned, he, being not eligible in terms of the conditions notified in the admission brochure, has rightly not been considered for admission to Ph. D. Course.
So far as the challenge to the conditions is concerned, this Court may only record that the UGC does not lay down any minimum condition for percentage marks to be obtained by a candidate in the Post Graduate, Under Graduate or Intermediate examination for being eligible for admission to M. Phil Course. It is always open to the University to lay down such minimum marks for being eligible for admission to M. Phil Courses. In the opinion of the Court the norms fixed do not violate any of the provisions of UGC (Minimum Standards And Procedure For Awards of M.Phil/Ph.D. Degree), Regulation, 2009.
So far as the plea of discrimination qua minimum marks being prescribed in the Bachelor degree and Intermediate examination for admission to Doctorate of Philosophy Course is concerned, it is an admitted position that an student admitted in Ph. D. Course has a period up to 5 years to complete the course, while M. Phil Course is for 2 years duration. Both courses are entirely different, may be that the qualifying examination for both the courses is one and the same i. e. Post Graduation. No plea of discrimination can be sustained.
If the University has prescribed different minimum marks for admission to Doctorate of Philosophy Course viz-a-viz the minimum marks for admission to M. Phil Course, no objection can be taken.
There is no substance in the writ petition, it is dismissed.
Order Date :- 30.10.2012
Pkb/
