[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Jharkhand High Court
Amit Kumar Choubey vs Central University Of Jharkhand ... on 5 February, 2026
Author: Rajesh Kumar
Bench: Rajesh Kumar
2026:JHHC:3131
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P.(C) No.2871 of 2024
Amit kumar Choubey, aged 42 years, R/o Jagdamba
Tower, 3rd Floor, Sahdeomahatomarg, Boring Road, P.O
& P.S Phulwari, District-Patna, Bihar-800001
...... Petitioner
Versus
1. Central University of Jharkhand through Registrar,
Nagri, P.O.-Manatu, P.S.-Kanke, District-Ranchi,
Jharkhand-835222.
2. The Registrar, Central University of Jharkhand,
Nagri, P.O.-Manatu, P.S.-Kanke, District-Ranchi,
Jharkhand-835222.
3. The Vice Chancellor, Central University of
Jharkhand, Nagri, P.O.-Manatu, P.S.-Kanke, District-
Ranchi, Jharkhand-835222.
4. Chairman Admission Cell, Central University of
Jharkhand, Nagri, P.O.-Manatu, P.S.-Kanke, District-
Ranchi, Jharkhand-835222.
5. The Controller of Examinations, Central University
of Jharkhand, Nagri, P.O.-Manatu, P.S.-Kanke,
District-Ranchi, Jharkhand-835222.
6. The Dean of Schools, Central University of
Jharkhand, Nagri, P.O.-Manatu, P.S.-Kanke, District-
Ranchi, Jharkhand-835222. ...... Respondents
---------
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR
---------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Afsar Raza, Advocate
For the Resp.-C.U.J : Mr. Manoj Tandon, Advocate
Mr. Siddharth Ranjan, Advocate
---------
th
28/Dated: 05 February, 2026
1. In compliance of order dated 04.02.2026, Mr. K. Kosala
Rao, Registrar, Central University of Jharkhand, Ranchi is
physically present before this Court.
2. From the arguments, pleadings and the factual matrix
of the case, which have been brought to my notice are as
under:-
(a) an advertisement being Ref No.CUJ/
Adm.Cell/ 2023/95 dated 24.07.2023 has been issued
by the C.U.J calling upon the candidature for
admission in Ph.D Program.
2026:JHHC:3131
(b) the petitioner has applied for admission in
Political Science & Public Administration and
International Relations in the light of the aforesaid
advertisement through seat matrix Reference
No.CUJ/Admn.cell/ 2023/ 189 dated 23.08.2023 and
accordingly admit card has been issued.
(c) the petitioner had participated in the
process and the result was published on 08.12.2023
and the petitioner has shown qualified for Ph.D
programme in Political Science & Public
Administration as well as in International Relations
and was called for the interview.
(d) the interview was conducted for Ph.D
Program in Political Science & Public Administration
on 20.12.2023 and for Ph.D Program in International
Relations on 21.12.2023.
(e) final result was declared on 26.12.2023 and
the name of the petitioner has not been shown in the
list of the qualified persons.
(f) as per the advertisement, 01 (one) seat was
available for the unreserved category, 04 (four) seats
for the other backward classes and 01 (one) seat for
the scheduled caste under the course Ph.D in
International Relations and this course/ category has
been agitated in the present writ petition.
(g) the petitioner has gathered some
information and thereafter the present writ petition
has been filed, claiming that the seats are still
vacant, but he has wrongly been denied admission.
3. The counter affidavit dated 08.07.2024 has been filed
on behalf of the respondent Nos.1 & 3 i.e. the Registrar and
the Vice Chancellor of the Central University of Jharkhand,
Ranchi. Paras - 8 to 12 of the counter affidavit are relevant,
which are quoted herein-below:-
"8. That the University published the Seat Matrix
of Ph.D. programme for the academic Session 2023-24
vide reference No.CUJ/Adm.Cell/2023/189 dated
23.08.2023, in which the petitioner applied. Following
2026:JHHC:3131
is the seat matrix for the disciplines of (i) Political
Science and Public Administration and (ii)
International Relations:
Ph.D. Progarm Total SC ST OBC EWS UR
Intake
Political Science and 2 0 0 0 0 2
Public Administration
International Relations 6 1 0 4 0 1
9. That, petitioner applied for Ph.D. admission in
(i) Political Science and Public Administration and (ii)
International Relations and was provisionally qualified
for the Ph.D. interview for both the subject. The
petitioner's Roll No. is at Serial No 78 and 135 in the
list of provisionally qualified candidates respectively.
The petitioner secured 52 marks in entrance exam for
International Relations. Accordingly, his score for
entrance exam was calculated as 36,4(70% of total
secured marks). Likewise, in Political Science and
Public Administration, he secured 55 marks, and his
score was calculated as 38.5 (70% of total secured
marks).
10. That, Ph.D. interview schedule for
provisionally qualified candidates was published vide
Reference No CUJ/Adm.Cell 2023/21/241 dated
11.12.2023. The Ph.D research areas for the academic
year 2023-24 was also uploaded on the University's
website.
11. That the petitioner appeared for interview in
both the programs. He secured 88 marks in
International Relations. Correspondingly by awarding
30% weightage for this score, the petitioner was given
26.4 marks for interview and in case of his interview in
the discipline of Political Science and Public
Administration, the petitioner was adjudicated as NOT
FOUND SUITABLE (like several other candidates) by
the duly constituted and approved expert committee
for interview/viva-voce of the concerned subject.
Hence, he was not given the offer of admission.
12. That with reference to Ph.D. admission of the
petitioner in the discipline International Relations, it is
submitted that he scored a total of 62.8 marks. The
Petitioner was 3rd in order of merit and hence the
candidate who secured maximum marks and was 1 st in
order of merit (Name: Nitesh Chandra Bhanu)
although belonging OBC category was offered
admission under UR Category. The candidates who was
2nd in order of merit (Name: Siddharth Kumar Saha)
belonging to OBC category, was offered admission
under OBC category, Accordingly, the petitioner was
placed in waiting list (WL-01)."
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has mainly relied
upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of
Ashok Kumar Thakur Vs. Union of India And Others;
2026:JHHC:3131
reported in (2008) 6 SCC 1, especially sub para (3) of para
358, which reads as under :-
"358 (3). The Central Government shall examine as
to the desirability of fixing cut-off marks in respect
of the candidates belonging to the Other Backward
Classes (OBCs). By way of illustration it can be
indicated that five grace marks can be extended to
such candidates below the minimum eligibility
marks fixed for general categories of students. This
would ensure that quality and merit would not
suffer. If any seats remain vacant after adopting
such norms they shall be filled up by candidates
from general categories."
5. The petitioner has also relied upon the judgment of the
Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of P.V. Indiresan (2) Vs.
Union of India And Others; reported in (2011) 8 SCC 441,
especially para - 54 (ii), which reads as under :-
"54(ii) If in any Central educational institution,
the OBC reservation seats remain Vacant, such
institutions shall fill the said seats with OBC
students. Only if OBC candidates possessing the
minimum eligibility/qualifying marks are not
available in the OBC merit list, the OBC seats shall
be converted into general category seats."
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also relied upon
the judgment dated 26.11.2025, passed in W.P.(C) No.4870
of 2015 by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court.
Referring to the aforesaid judgments, it has been
pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner that seat
cannot be kept vacant or carried forward. There is academic
sessions and there is no concept of carry forward of the
vacant seat. Admittedly, one seat was available but none of
the candidates was available, save and except the present
petitioner and as such, the candidature of the petitioner
should have been accepted, allowing him to take admission.
7. Subsequently, counter affidavit dated 22.08.2025 has
been filed by the respondent Nos.1 & 3. Para - 3 of the same,
is relevant, which is quoted herein-below:-
"3. That it is further submitted that the aforesaid
three vacant OBC category seats were carried forward
and merged with the intake of the academic session
2024-25, thereby making a total of nine seats in the
said Department, against which admissions have
already been completed."
2026:JHHC:3131
8. Response dated 13.11.2025 has also been filed by the
petitioner to the above counter affidavit. Para - 4 & 11 are
relevant, which is quoted herein-below:-
"4. That with regards to the averments made in
Para 2 of the supplementary counter affidavit under
reply, it is denied and humbly stated that with regards
to admission in Ph.D. in the Department of
International Relations in the Central University,
Jharkhand, Ranchi for the Academic Session 2023-24,
the seat distribution matrix [Annex-1(Series) Writ
Petition), as noted at Sl. No. 17 are as follows:
Ph.D in International Relations
INTAKE SC ST OBC EWS UR
11. That with regards to the averments made in
Para 4 of the the supplementary counter affidavit
under reply, it is denied and humbly stated that the
statement is malafide and false and contrary to law.
There is no rule or UGC regulation or regulation
governing Respondent University in accordance with
which the vacant OBC category seats for the academic
year 2023-24 could be carried forward and merged
with the intake of the academic year 2024-25. The
same would also be evident from the notice dated
03.03.2025 concerning the seat Matrix for Ph.D.
programmes for the Academic year 2024-25 and there
being only one seat in the OBC category."
9. Thus, factually the seat has been carried forward and it
has been de-reserved and offered to the general category
candidate in the next academic sessions ,appears to be prima
facie wrong. Accordingly, vide order dated 04.02.2026, the
Registrar of the Central University of Jharkhand, Ranchi has
been called upon to explain and asked to appear in person.
In compliance of the said order, the Registrar, Central
University of Jharkhand, Ranchi has appeared in person and
he has tendered unconditional apology, stating that this
statement is factually incorrect and this mistake has crept in,
due to the wrong communication given by his office.
10. Thus, it is an admitted position that the petitioner has
been denied seat by navigating in a manner, which is not
acceptable to the rule of law. It is an admitted position that a
seat cannot be kept vacant as it is nothing, but waste of the
national resources. The education is empowering and infusing
2026:JHHC:3131
capacity in the Indians to make a better society. National
assets is nothing but the quality of population. Enhancing the
quality of population is the duty of the State and they have to
take all the endeavour and it has also been mandated under
the Constitution of India especially, in Part IV i.e. The
Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSP).
11. In the present case, not only the factually incorrect
statements have been made by the respondents, but a seat
has also been wrongly denied to the petitioner in spite of
litigation and several opportunities have been granted.
Instead of correcting themselves, the endeavour has been
made to defeat the claim of the petitioner by navigating in a
wrong manner.
12. In view of above discussions and settled principle of law,
a seat cannot be kept vacant, rather it has to be offered to the
eligible candidate. Since the petitioner is only eligible in all
respect and this is an admitted position, the present writ
petition is, hereby, allowed directing the respondents to admit
the petitioner within three weeks from today.
13. With the above observation and direction, the present
writ petition stands allowed.
14. Personal appearance of the Registrar, Central
University of Jharkhand, Ranchi, is dispensed with.
15. Pending interlocutory application, if any, stands
disposed of.
(Rajesh Kumar, J.)
05th February, 2026
Ravi-Chandan/-
Uploaded on 06.02.2026
