Delhi High Court
Laxman Singh vs Jawaharlal Nehru University & ... on 14 July, 2008
Author: Ajit Prakash Shah
* HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ LPA No.268/2008
LAXMAN SINGH ..... Appellant
Through: Mr.Atulesh kumar, Advocate
Versus
JAWAHARLAL NEHRU UNIVERSITY
& OTHERS ..... Respondents
Through Mr.S.C. Dhanda, Advocate for JNU
CORAM:
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR
1. Whether reporters of the local papers be allowed to see
the judgment ? No
2. To be referred to the Reporter or not ? No
3. Whether the judgment should be reported
in the Digest ? No
JUDGMENT
% 14.07.2008
1. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for the
appellant as well as the counsel for Jawaharlal Nehru University
(JNU).
2. The appellant was a student of the School of Arts, JNU and
has completed his MA in Arts and Aesthetics from JNU. He
appeared in the entrance examination conducted by the JNU for
admission in the MPhil (Arts & Aesthetics) course for the academic
year 2006-07 in the reserved category of Scheduled Castes. The
appellant was not selected. His main grievance is that out of the
total 21 students selected for the MPhil (Arts & Aesthetics) Course,
four students were not eligible as they had not studied arts and
aesthetics as their subjects in their MA curriculum. The appellant
contended that the eligibility criteria for MPhil (Arts & Aesthetics) is
'a Masters Degree in any branch of Arts and Aesthetics' and 'any
branch' would mean Masters in Music, Dance, Theatre,
Architecture, Sculpture, Painting etc. It is stated that the four
candidates who have been selected had not done Masters course in
any branch in Arts and Aesthetics but have studied some other
subjects like History, Sanskrit etc.
3. On behalf of JNU it has been pointed out that they are the
only institution in India conducting the Masters course in Arts and
Aesthetics and no other institution in India has a similar course. It
has been pointed out that JNU is a Central University running
specialized courses which are not normally taught in other
universities and its courses are designed to cater to students from
not only all over India but also abroad. The courses in Arts and
Aesthetics are such courses which have been designed with a wide
perspective and have nothing to do with the performing arts. It is
pointed out by the respondent that if the eligibility for undertaking
the course of MPhil in Arts and Aesthetics was restricted only to
students who had pursued only Arts and Aesthetics in the Masters
programme, it would mean that admissions to the MPhil
programme would be restricted only to students of JNU which
would be opposite to the basic object of the University. It is further
explained that the course of Arts and Aesthetics is not restricted to
teachings about the performing or visual arts alone but is related to
the study of history of arts, anthropology, media and other allied
cultural studies. The students coming different streams of arts
including history, anthropology, media and other allied cultural
studies would be equally well equipped to undertake the course.
4. The stand of JNU has been accepted by the learned single
Judge. We find no reason to take a different view than that taken
by the learned single Judge. As per the brochure, a candidate is
required to possess a Masters Degree in any branch of Arts and
Aesthetics with at least 50% marks. The expression 'masters
degree in any branch of Arts and Aesthetics' clearly indicates the
intendment of the eligibility condition and that the eligibility was
not restricted to candidates who possessed a masters degree only
in arts and aesthetics. Therefore, we find no infirmity in the order
passed by the learned single Judge. The appeal has no merit and is
accordingly dismissed.
CHIEF JUSTICE
S.MURALIDHAR
JULY 14, 2008 (JUDGE)
'v'
