Decided On: 06.03.202 vs Dr. Yashwant Singh Parmar ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 1752 HP

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CWP No.369 of 2021 Reserved on: 04.03.2021

.

                                Decided on: 06.03.2021
     Sakshi Chauhan & another             ......petitioners





                                           Versus

Dr. Yashwant Singh Parmar University of Horticulture and Forestry & another ...... respondents

........................................................................................... Coram Ms. Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Yes.

Whether approved for reporting?1

For the petitioners : Mr. Surender K. Sharma, Advocate.

For the respondent : Mr. Avinash Jaryal, Advocate.

Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge

Aggrieved against rejection of their candidature for

admission to M.Sc (Agri Business Programme) by respondent

No.1/University, the petitioners have preferred the instant writ

petition.

2(i) Respondent No.1/University in May 2020, published its

prospectus for admission to M.Sc/MBA (Agri Business Programme) for

academic session 2020­2021. The last date for receipt of application

form was 8.6.2020. The application form alongwith late fee could be

submitted by 15.6.2020. The entrance test was scheduled for 27.6.2020.

Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

Chapter­III of the prospectus pertained to 'admission to normal and

self financing seats'. Clause 3.1 (a)(iv) whereof prescribed minimum

.

qualification i.e. eligibility of candidates for different disciplines of

M.Sc/MBA (Agri Business Programme). Relevant clause under this

chapter is extracted hereinafter:­

"3.1 Minimum Qualification/eligibility The eligibility criteria of candidates to the different disciplines of M.Sc/MBA (Agri Business) programmes is given below:

(iv) Bsc (Hons) Horticulture/B Sc Horticulture/B.Sc (Hons) Forestry/ B Sc Forestry 4 years programme under ICAR­AU system (SAUs/ CAUs/ CU's with Agriculture faculty). However, if seats remain vacant, the candidates with B Sc (Hons) Biotechnology/B Tech Biotechnology, B Sc (Hons) Agriculture/ B

Sc Agriculture under ICAR­AU system (SAUs/ CAUs/ CU's with

Agriculture faculty) shall be considered on merit basis in order of preference. If seats still remain vacant the candidates with BSC Medical under ICAR­AU system or UGC recognized universities will be considered on merit basis."

2(ii) Both the petitioners had passed Bachelors of Science

(Hons) in Agriculture from respondent No.2/University in the year

2020. Respondent No.2/University is a private university, stated to be

affiliated/recognized by the University Grant Commission (hereinafter

referred as UGC). Respondent No.2­ University's name figures at Sr.

No. 266 of the list of universities (Annexure P­2) affiliated/recognized

by the UGC. The petitioners applied for Post­graduate course in terms

of the time line indicated in the prospectus.

2(iii) On 26.11.2020, respondent No.1/University in view of

adoption of a new reservation roster and due to Covid­19 pandemic,

revised/amended its prospectus for admission to the B.Sc/M.Sc/MBA

(Agri Business Programme). Under the amended prospectus, the

reservation roster was statedly modified and seats were shuffled from

.

one discipline to another. The provision of entrance test stipulated

under clause 3.3 of the original prospectus also underwent change.

Under the amended clause 3.3, there was to be no entrance test for

PGET­2020 for admission in Post­graduate programme for the

academic year 2020­2021. In view of Covid­19 pandemic, the merit list

of candidates was to be prepared by taking into account their

OCPA/Marks obtained in the qualifying degree plus weightage of

sports (cultural) co­curricular activities, NCC, Scouting and MSS, if

any. However, the minimum qualification/eligibility criteria as

prescribed earlier in Chapter­III of the original prospectus remained

unchanged. Under amended prospectus the candidates were required

to send their counselling proformas alongwith relevant certificates.

Petitioner No.1, accordingly, submitted her counselling proforma for

normal seat as well as self financing seat indicating her preferences in

seriatum. Similarly, petitioner No.2 also furnished her counselling

proforma for normal seat.

2(iv) On 3.12.2020, respondent No.1 issued a notice, relevant

portion whereof, is extracted hereinafter:­

"This is for the information of the applicants, who have applied for admission to M.Sc. Programmes of this University for the Academic Session 2020­21 for Normal Seats and have passed their B.SC Agriculture/Horticulture/Forestry etc. degree from

SAUs/CAUs/CUs with Agriculture Faculty that the University has prepared tentative merit list on the basis of the documents supplied by the applicants with their counselling proforma. There is a separate list of those candidates, who have passed their B.Sc degree from Non­SAUs/CAUs/CUs with Agriculture faculty and

.

in accordance with the prescribed minimum qualification, they are

not entitled for allotment of seat in M.Sc programme of this University."

In terms of the above notice, candidates who had passed

their B.Sc degree from Non­SAUs/CAUs/CUs with Agriculture Faculty

and in accordance with prescribed minimum qualifications were held

not entitled for allotment of seats in M.Sc programme. Names of the

petitioners were also part of the list of rejected candidates appended

alongwith the notice.

2(v) For continuation of facts, it may be noticed that on

11.12.2020, respondent No.1 issue an addendum carrying out following

amendments in Chapter­III of the prospectus:­

"The candidates who have passed out from ICAR­AU system (SAUs/CAUs with Agriculture Factuly) and ICAR accredited

universities/colleges/programmes, public funded/Govt. Institutions (including their constituent colleges­irrespective of ICAR accreditation) are eligible for admission through

counselling on merit basis. However, candidates passed out from agricultural private universities/colleges not accredited by ICAR, even though affiliated to public funded/Govt. Institutions are not eligible for admission. Other conditions will remain same".

This was followed by yet another addendum on

15.12.2020, which reads as under:­

"The candidates who have passed out from ICAR­AU system (SAUs/CAUs with Agriculture Factuly) and ICAR accredited universities/colleges/programmes, public funded/Govt. Institutions (including their constituent colleges­irrespective of ICAR accreditation) are eligible for admission through counselling on merit basis.

However, candidates having B Sc 4­year degrees of Horticulture/Forestry/Agriculture/Food Technology from agricultural private universities/colleges not accredited by ICAR, even though affiliated to public funded/Govt. Institutions are not eligible for admission. Other conditions will remain same".

.

Since candidature of the petitioners were rejected,

therefore, the instant petition has been preferred for the following

substantive reliefs:­

"(i) That the impugned Annexure­P7, dated 3rd December, 2020, whereby the candidature of the petitioners for admission to M.Sc

(Agriculture) Programme has been rejected, may kindly be quashed and set aside.

(ii) That the impugned Annexure­P8 (colly), addedums dated 11th December, 2020 and 15 th December, 2020 whereby the eligibility criteria for admission to M.Sc (Agriculture) Programme was

modified/notified midway the admission/selection process, may

kindly be quashed and set aside.

(iii) That the respondent No.1­University may kindly be directed to consider the candidature of the petitioners for admission to M.Sc (Agriculture) Programme strictly as per the merit of the petitioners against normal seats or self financing seats;"

3. Heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through

the pleadings & documents appended therewith.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the

respondents were bound by the terms and conditions including the

minimum qualification/eligibility criteria stipulated in the original

prospectus issued in May 2020. The petitioners were eligible under

eligibility criteria laid down in the original prospectus, therefore, their

candidature could not have been rejected by respondent No.1­

University. Notice dated 3.12.2020, rejecting the candidature of the

petitioners was not in consonance with the terms of the original

prospectus. The addendums dated 11.12.2020 and 15.12.2020 could

not be taken into consideration for determining the eligibility of the

.

petitioners for admission to Post­graduate courses. The rules of the

game could not be altered to the disadvantage of the petitioners after

the ball was set rolling. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied

upon 2015 (8) SCC 484, titled Prakash Chand Meena and Others

Vs. State of Rajasthan and others, 2014 (5) SCC 774, titled Bishnu

Biswas and others Vs. Union of India and others, 1997 (6) SCC

623, titled Chairman, Railway Board and others Vs. C.R.

Rangadhamaih and others, in support of his contention that

change in norms effected post the advertisement, cannot be

retrospectively applied to the selection process.

Learned counsel for respondent No.1 submitted that

petitioners were not eligible under the prospectus and therefore, their

candidature has been rightly rejected. Learned counsel also referred to

the following disclaimer clause contained in prospectus issued in May

2020, to canvass that modification of the terms of the prospectus was

within the purview of the respondent­university in view of the liberty

available to them, under the following disclaimer clause.

"1. The information contained in this Prospectus is of general nature for the candidates seeking admission in various Post­ Graduate Degree Programmes of the University. It is neither an exhaustive nor a legal document. The information contained herein is believed to be correct at the time of publication. However, the University reserves the right to make any alteration without any

notice in the provisions made in the prospectus, whereupon, the University will not be responsible for any hardship or expense incurred by any student or any other person for such changes, additions, omissions or errors, no matter how they are caused.

2. Candidates are advised to refer to the Academic Regulations and

.

other Statutory/Administrative provisions applicable on a

particular point of time on various aspects, viz, System of Education, Residence in the University Hostels, Award of Scholarships/Stipends, Fellowships, Medals, Certificates of Merit,

Conduct of the Students in the University ,etc. They should also note that the provisions of the Act, Statutes and Academic Regulations or any other legal/administrative notifications, orders, instructions and fee structure can be changed by the Competent Authority at any time without any prior notice."

5(i) It has been submitted that petitioners' candidature cannot

be rejected by respondent No.1­University by falling upon the notice

dated 3.12.2020 (Annexure P­7), addendum dated 11.12.2020 (Annexure

P­8) and addendum dated 15.12.2020. It is the case of the petitioners

that their eligibility is to be determined only as per the stipulations

contained in the original prospectus issued in May 2020. The

amendment carried out to the prospectus on 26.11.2020 (Annexure P­5),

is not questioned by the petitioners, in compliance to which, the

petitioners had submitted their counselling proformas. This is perhaps

for the reason that the prospectus issued on 26.11.2020 had retained

the conditions in respect of determining the eligibility criteria with

which petitioners were concerned. Be that as it may.

5(ii) A perusal of the reply filed by respondent No.1 gives a

clear indication that despite justifying the issuance of addendums, even

according to respondent No.1, the candidature of the petitioners was

required to be determined in accordance with eligibility criteria laid

down in the prospectus issued in May 2020, which criteria was also

.

retained in amended prospectus issued on 26.11.2020. This is apparent

from the following averments made in para­8 of their reply on merits

(also para­3 of reply on preliminary submission)

"However, it is submitted that notice No.UHF/COF/Acad­1­ 2/2020 dated 3.12.2020 (Annexure R­6) has no bearing on rejection of the petitioner as they did not qualify for M.Sc programme as per

the provision of original prospectus published in the month of May, 2020 on the university website. In the light of above, the candidature cannot be accepted as per the terms of provision in prospectus uploaded during May, 2020."

When it is stand of respondent No.1 itself that the

candidature of the petitioners was rejected as they did not qualify for

M.Sc programme as per the provisions of original prospectus published

in the month of May, 2020 as against the stand of the petitioners that

their candidature could not have been rejected and that they were to be

considered for M.Sc Programme in terms of the original prospectus, then

it becomes incumbent for this Court to see the eligibility of the

petitioners vis­a­vis the terms contained in the original prospectus

issued in May,2020.

5(ii)(a) Following minimum qualification/eligibility criteria has

been prescribed for admission to normal & self financing seats in M.Sc

(Agri) Entomology) Plant Pathology (concerned disciplines involved &

highlighted in instant petition) in Chapter­III of the prospectus

issued by respondent No.1 in May 2020.

.

"3.1 Minimum Qualification/eligibility

The eligibility criteria of candidates to the different disciplines of M.Sc/MBA (Agri Business) programmes is given below:

(iv) Bsc (Hons) Horticulture/B Sc Horticulture/B.Sc (Hons) Forestry/ B Sc Forestry 4 years programme under ICAR­AU system (SAUs/ CAUs/ CU's with Agriculture faculty). However, if seats remain vacant, the candidates with B Sc (Hons) Biotechnology/B Tech Biotechnology, B Sc (Hons) Agriculture/

B Sc Agriculture under ICAR­AU system (SAUs/ CAUs/ CU's with Agriculture faculty) shall be considered on merit basis in order of preference. If seats still remain vacant the candidates with BSC Medical under ICAR­AU system or

UGC recognized universities will be considered on merit basis."

5(ii)(b) A reading of the above extracted criteria shows that

initially, the candidates who have obtained B.Sc (Hons) Horticulture/

B.Sc Horticulture/ B.Sc (Hons) Forestry/ B.Sc Forestry 4 years

programme under ICAR­AU system (State Agricultural Universities,

Central Agricultural Universities, Central Universities with

Agriculture faculty) will be considered on merit basis for admission.

If after consideration of candidates falling under first

clause, the seats still remain vacant then the candidates with B.Sc

(Hons) Biotechnology/B­Tech Bio­technology, B.Sc (Hons)

Agriculture/B.Sc Agriculture under ICAR­AU system (State

Agricultural Universities, Central Agricultural Universities, Central

Universities with Agriculture faculty) will be considered on merit basis

in order of preference.

.

In case after consideration of the candidates falling in

above two clauses, seats still remain vacant then the candidates with

B.Sc Medical under ICAR­AU system or UGC recognized university will

be considered on merit basis.

Petitioners have obtained B.Sc (Hons) Agriculture

degrees from respondent No.2­University, which is not under ICAR­AU

system. Respondent No.2 is not State Agricultural University/Central

Agricultural University/Central University with Agriculture faculty. It

is a private university affiliated/recognized by the UGC. Petitioners

have not obtained B.Sc (Medical) degree from a UGC recognized

university. Petitioners definitely do not fall under the first two clauses.

Names of the petitioners cannot even be considered under the third

clause as they have not passed out B.Sc Medical either from ICAR­AU

system or from UGC recognized University. Petitioners have passed out

from a private University recognized by UGC, however, their degrees

were B.Sc (Hons) Agriculture and not B.Sc Medical. The averment in

the writ petition that in past respondent No.1 has admitted students

having B.Sc (Hons) Agriculture from respondent No.2­University

cannot come to aid of the petitioners in view of the clear eligibility

criteria prescribed in the prospectus issued in May 2020, for the year

2020­21. There could be many such candidates who might not have

applied in view of clear stipulation of the prospectus and there could be

.

many such candidates whose candidature might have been rejected by

respondent No.1 on the grounds similar to the ones taken for rejecting

the candidature of the petitioners. Howsoever hard the case of the

petitioners may appear to be, the fact cannot be lost sight of, that

petitioners had applied under the terms stipulated in the original

prospectus & have also based their claim in the instant petition on such

terms/eligibility criteria as contained in the original prospectus issued

in May 2020. There is no challenge to the eligibility criteria as laid

down in the prospectus issued in May 2020. As already observed,

petitioners do not satisfy the eligibility criteria as laid down in the

original prospectus. The judgments cited by the learned counsel for the

petitioners with respect to change of rules of game after the issuance of

the prospectus are not applicable to the facts of instant case, where

petitioners do not satisfy the eligibility criteria even as per original

prospectus. No other point was urged.

For the aforesaid reasons, it cannot be said that

petitioners satisfy the eligibility criteria laid down in the prospectus

issued in May, 2020 for admission to M.Sc (Agri) Entomology/Plant

Pathology. Accordingly, finding no merit in the instant writ petition,

the same is dismissed. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also

stand disposed of.

.

                                             Jyotsna Rewal Dua





                                                 Judge

      March 06, 2021 (rohit)





                      r           to