Ajay Kumar vs University Of Delhi & Ors.
2010 Latest Caselaw 4980 Del

             *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

                                          Date of decision: 28th October, 2010.

+                           W.P.(C) No.6128/2008
%

AJAY KUMAR                                                 ..... PETITIONER
                            Through:      Mr. Sandeep Jindal, Advocate

                                       Versus

UNIVERSITY OF DELHI & ORS.                 ..... RESPONDENTS
                 Through: Mr. Mohinder J.S. Rupal & Ms.
                           Preeti Maniktalya, Advocates for
                           respondent No.1.
                           Mr. Mayank Manish, Advocate for
                           Mr. Amitesh Kumar, Advocate for
                           respondent No.2.
                           Mr. Vinay Garg with Mr. Rajesh
                           Yadav & Mr. A.S. Singh, Advocates
                           for respondent No.3
CORAM :-
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW
1.       Whether reporters of Local papers may              Yes.
         be allowed to see the judgment?

2.       To be referred to the reporter or not?             Yes.

3.       Whether the judgment should be reported            Yes.
         in the Digest?

RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J.

1. The petition was filed for directing the respondent No.1 University of

Delhi to grant admission to the petitioner to LLB course.

2. The eligibility prescribed for admission to LLB is Graduate / Post

Graduate Degree from University of Delhi or any other Indian or Foreign

University recognized as equivalent by the University of Delhi with at least

50% marks or an equivalent grade point in the aggregate in either of them.

The petitioner seeks admission on the basis of LLM Degree obtained by him

from Amity University. Though Amity University was not impleaded as a

respondent when the petition was originally filed but the petitioner applied

for its impleadment as a respondent and which was allowed.

3. The respondent refused admission to the petitioner for twofold

reasons. Firstly, that the LLM Degree of Amity University on the basis of

which admission is sought is not recognized by the University of Delhi. It

is contended that the Amity University has never approached the University

of Delhi for recognizing the said Degree. Secondly, that the Post Graduate

Degree on the basis of which admission to LLB course can be sought has to

be in a stream other than law; it is urged that Post Graduation in a subject

cannot be a qualification for admission to Graduation in the same subject.

4. This Court after hearing the counsels on 12 th May, 2009 (i.e. before

Amity University was impleaded as a party), considering that the issues

raised in the petition could not be decided in the absence of University

Grants Commission (UGC), impleaded the UGC as a party. UGC in its

counter affidavit with reference to Section 26 of the UGC Act, 1956 and the

Regulations framed thereunder has pleaded that no student is eligible to seek

admission to Master's course, who has not successfully pursued the First

Degree course of three years duration in that faculty; unless and until a

candidate successfully pursues the first degree course of three years

duration, he cannot be eligible for admission to Master's course. It is thus

the stand of UGC that if a Master's Degree has been obtained in

contravention of the Regulations aforesaid, such Master's Degree cannot be

termed a valid degree for any purpose including employment.

5. The counsel for the University has argued that the petitioner even

though has not claimed admission to the LLB course on the basis of his

Graduation Degree, is not eligible on that basis also for the reason of having

not secured the requisite 50% marks therein; that the LLM Degree from

Amity University on the basis whereof admission is claimed is not

recognized and thus even though the petitioner has secured more than 50%

in the said LLM Degree but the same cannot be the basis of his admission;

that admission to Bachelor's course in a subject after having done Master's

course in the same subject in any case is not possible. Reliance is placed on

Guru Nanak Dev University Vs. Sanjay Kumar Katwal (2009) 1 SCC 610

where the Supreme Court held that normally a student cannot enroll for a

Master's Degree unless he has a basic Bachelor's Degree in the chosen

subject and that recognition of a Degree is a policy decision relating to

academic matter with which the Court will not interfere.

6. The counsel for the petitioner relies on the prospectus and syllabus of

Amity University for the LLM course done by the petitioner, to the reply to

a question in the Lok Sabha to the effect that Amity University has been

established by the Government of Uttar Pradesh and to the Judgment of the

Division Bench of this Court in University Grants Commission Vs. Amity

University 145 (2007) DLT 721 laying down that no recognition from UGC

is required for establishment of a University.

7. The counsel for the UGC in response informs that the Special Leave

Petition preferred to the Supreme Court against the judgment aforesaid of

the Division Bench of this Court has been admitted and the appeal is

pending.

8. The counsel for the petitioner also relies on the judgment dated 28th

August, 2008 of this Court in WP(C) No.7350/2007 titled Amity University

Vs. Delhi University. However, the said judgment grants relief merely on

the basis that the Degree of Amity University under consideration in that

case had been recognized by the Delhi University. Rather the said case

lends support to the proposition that without such recognition, there could be

no admission.

9. The counsel for the Amity University has contended that the Statute /

Ordinance of the Delhi University providing for empowering the University

to determine equivalence of a degree is void.

10. As far as the contention of the Amity University is concerned, the

same does not arise for consideration in the present petition. The Amity

University has not approached the Court challenging the Statute / Ordinance

of the Delhi University. The petitioner also has not challenged the same.

The petitioner has preferred this petition merely on the ground that the LLM

Degree conferred on him by the Amity University is a Post Graduation

Degree and on the basis thereof the petitioner is entitled to admission. As

noted in the order dated 12th May, 2009 of this Court, under Statute 8 of the

Delhi University framed under the Delhi University Act, 1922, the

University has a right to recognize Diplomas and Degrees of other

Universities and Institutions and to determine their corresponding value in

relation to those of the Delhi University. The University, has stated in its

counter affidavit has not recognized the Post Graduate Degree of LLM of

the Amity University as equivalent to any Degree of the Delhi University.

Thus, it cannot be said that the Delhi University in refusing admission to the

petitioner has violated any of its Statutes, Ordinances, Rule or Regulations.

11. It is settled position in law that no mandamus as sought can be

granted to direct a person / Institution to act in contravention of its Rules &

Regulations. Reference in this regard may be made to Maharishi

Dayanand University Vs. Surjeet Kaur JT 2010 (7) SC 179. I even

otherwise do not find the stand of the University of Delhi to be so

unreasonable so as to still entertain this petition. There is nothing wrong in

a University providing that recognition by it of Degrees of other University

shall be subject to decision of its Equivalence Committee. Without the

same, the University may not be able to maintain its academic standards. It

is also not as if the said rule is applicable to Amity University only. The said

rule is a general rule and nothing prevents Amity University from having its

Degrees recognized by Delhi University. However this shall be subject to

the very validity of the said LLM Degree, in view of the stand of UGC.

12. The Supreme Court in Prof. Yashpal Vs. State of Chattisgarh AIR

2005 SC 2026 held that mere conferment of Degree is not enough; what is

necessary is that the Degree should be recognized.

13. There is also merit in the other contention of the Delhi University that

there can be no admission to a Bachelor's course in a subject on the basis of

a Master's Degree in the same subject inasmuch as the same tantamounts to

putting the cart before the horse. I find that the Supreme Court in

Annamalai University Vs. Information & Tourism Department (2009) 4

SCC 590 reiterated the Master's Degree obtained, in that case in Open

University, without obtaining first a Bachelor's Degree to be not valid.

14. The petition is dismissed. I refrain from imposing any costs on the

petitioner.

RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW (JUDGE) 28th October, 2010 'gsr'