Delhi High Court
Dr. Rama Shukla vs Union Of India on 26 February, 2014
Author: Manmohan
#2
$~
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 604/2014
DR. RAMA SHUKLA ..... Petitioner
Through Mr. Manoj Sharma with Mr. Shaid
Ali Rao and Mr. Saurabh Sharma,
Advocates.
Petitioner in person.
versus
UNION OF INDIA ..... Respondent
Through Mr. Gourav Garg, Advocate for
Ms. Richa Kapoor, CGSC.
% Date of Decision : 26th February, 2014
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN
JUDGMENT
MANMOHAN, J: (Oral)
1. With consent of parties, matter is taken up for final disposal.
2. Present writ petition has been filed seeking a direction to maintain the
number of awards as fifteen in accordance with past practice and to
constitute a new Screening and Recommending Committee to consider bio-
data of Prof. Radha Vallabh Tripathi for award of President's Certificate of
Honour in Sanskrit for the year 2013. Petitioner also prays that above
exercise be completed prior to the start of procedure for inviting proposals
for President's Certificate of Honour for the year 2014.
3. Learned counsel for petitioner states that in 2013 the number of
awardees has been illegally reduced from the past practice of fifteen to
thirteen and the Committee arbitrarily ignored the name of Prof. Radha
Vallabh Tripathi despite being recommended by a previous Awardee, Dr.
Rama Kant Shukla. In support of his contention, learned counsel for
petitioner relies upon an extract from internet/website wherein it is stated
that there are fifteen awards for Sanskrit, three each for Arabic and Persian
and one for Pali/Prakrit under the Scheme.
4. Learned counsel for petitioner further states that Prof. Tripathi's bio-
data and credential are more impressive than those who have been conferred
the Award.
5. In the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of respondent-UOI it is stated
that the Presidential Award of Certificate of Honour and Maharshi Badrayan
Vyas Samman for the Sanskrit scholars are the most prestigious national
award for the exceptional and eminent scholars, which are given every year.
6. According to the counter-affidavit, the nominations for these awards
are invited from the Secretaries of Government of India, Chief Secretaries
and Education Secretaries of all State Governments/Union Territories, Vice
Chancellors of Universities/Deemed Universities, Awardees of Certificate of
Honour from the previous year and Heads of Indian Missions abroad
through Secretary, Ministry of External Affairs.
7. It is further stated that applications of the scholars received for the
Award are scrutinised by the Pre-Scrutiny Committee consisting of the
Deputy Secretary (Languages), Ministry of Human Resource Development,
Government of India and Vice Chancellors of the three Sanskrit Universities
under the said Ministry, viz., Rashtriya Sanskrit Sansthan, New Delhi,
Rashtriya Sanskrit Vidyapeetha, Tirupati and Shri Lal Bahadur Shastri
Rashtriya Sanskrit Vidyapeeth, New Delhi.
8. List of all the applicants, recommended and not recommended, is
placed before the Selection Committee for further consideration. The
Selection Committee comprises a distinguished scholar of Sanskrit language
as Chairman, two specialists in Sanskrit and one specialist each in Arabic,
Persian and Palli/Prakrit as members and Joint Secretary (Languages) as
Member-Secretary.
9. The recommendations of the Selection Committee are approved by
the Minister of Human Resource Development, Prime Minister and
President of India.
10. In the counter-affidavit, it is averred that the Awardees in the present
case had been approved by all the Committees as well as Minister, Prime
Minister and President.
11. It is also averred in the counter-affidavit that in 2013 though sixteen
President's Award of Certificate of Honour for Sanskrit language including
one International Award for NRI or foreigner for life-time contribution of
scholars to Sanskrit language were to be conferred, yet only fourteen
Scholars including one international Scholar were found suitable for the
Award and thus, recommended. Even for Persian language only two out of
three prescribed Awardees were recommended.
12. Learned counsel for respondent states that the nomination of Prof.
Radha Vallabh Tripathi was considered and Committee recommended only
thirteen names stating that 'no one found suitable' for the remaining two
awards.
13. Having heard learned counsel for parties, this Court is of the view that
it is not mandatory for the Government to award every year fifteen
President's Certificate of Honour in Sanskrit. Consequently, in the opinion
of this Court, depending on availability of talent, it is open to the
government to decrease the number of awardees in a particular year.
14. It is settled law that courts examine the decision making process and
not the decision. In the present instance, a very elaborate and detailed
exercise at different levels has been carried out to select the awardees.
Further, there is nothing on record to show that persons who have been
awarded the President's Certificate of Honour in Sanskrit for the year 2013
are not qualified or deserving. Neither any allegation has been levelled
against any Awardee or any member of Screening Committee nor any of
them has been impleaded as respondent.
15. Moreover, in the opinion of this Court, awards like President's
Certificate of Honour in Sanskrit should be bestowed upon a scholar and not
be sought by way of a writ petition. Accordingly, present writ petition being
bereft of merits is dismissed, but with no order as to costs.
MANMOHAN, J
FEBRUARY 26, 2014
rn
