Patna High Court - Orders
Sandip Kumar vs The University Grants Commission (Ugc) ... on 2 September, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10283 of 2021
======================================================
Sandip Kumar Son of Sri Binod Sharma, Resident of Village-Got Kharik, P.O.
and P.S.-Kharik Bazar, District-Bhagalpur.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The University Grants Commission (UGC) through Chairman, Bahadursah
Zafar Marg, New Delhi 110002.
2. The Chairman, UGC, Bahadursah Zafar Marg, New Delhi 110002.
3. The Secretary, UGC, Bahadursah Zafar Marg, New Delhi 110002.
4. The National Testing Agency (NTA) C-20, 1 A/8, Sector 62, IITK Outreach
Centre, Noida 201309.
5. The Senior Director, NTA C-20, 1 A/8, Sector 62, IITK Outreach Centre,
Noida 201309.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr.Amrendra Narayan Rai, Adv.
For the Respondents : Mr.P.C. Agrawal, Adv.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH
SHARMA
ORAL ORDER
2 02-09-2022Heard the parties through video conferencing.
2. The petitioner by way of this writ petition has prayed to direct the respondent-authorities for issuance of JRF award certificate as the petitioner appeared in the examination and has been declared qualified UGC-NET and JRF, 2019 examination. Learned counsel submits that the respondents should have therefore issued a certificate relating to JRF also. Counsel further submits that his date of birth is 15 th February, 1984 in the application form and he has not concealed any facts from the respondents on the ground of age, therefore, JRF Patna High Court CWJC No.10283 of 2021(2) dt.02-09-2022 2/7 certificate could not be withheld.
3. A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondents 1 2 and 3 and it is stated that in order to maintain uniform standard of teaching and research in the country, the Government of India, as per the new education policy has published that those candidates who besides fulfilling the minimum academic qualification prescribed for the post of Lecturer must pass NET exam to become eligible for appointment as Lecturer. It is further stated that the UGC after having consulted with academicians and others, conducted the first NET for JRF as per laid down eligibility criteria on 24 th December, 1989 and has thereafter continued to conduct examinations by itself till June, 2014. The examination has been out sourced and therefore after 2014 the Central Board of Secondary Education is conducting examination up to July, 2018. Thereafter the task has been handed over to NTA.
4. Any person who appears in the examination, would not therefore have a right to the certificate if he or she does not fulfill the requisites conditions laid down in the advertisement and as per the provisions of the UGC. The UGC-NET examination conducted in June, 2019 was conducted by the NTA.
Patna High Court CWJC No.10283 of 2021(2) dt.02-09-2022 3/7
5. It is submitted that the petitioner appeared and qualified the UGC-NET held in June, 2019, however, the result was subject to the fulfillment of the eligibility condition of UGC-Net.
6. The UGC had conveyed through its information bulletin issued in June, 2019, that the maximum age for participation in UGC-NET/JRF would be 30 years and maximum five years relaxation would be allowed for JRF and for Assistant Professor there shall be no upper age limit.
7. The learned counsel for the respondent UGC submits that as on 01.06.2019, the petitioner was above 35 years of age and therefore he was declared ineligible for JRF while being eligible for Lecturership/Assistant Professor. Learned counsel has also taken this Court to Clause 4(vi) on Eligibility, mentioned in the information bulletin in June, 2019, which provide as under :
"Age limit and Relaxation
a) JRF : Not more than 30 years as on 01.06.2019.
A relaxation of upto 5 years is provided to the candidates belonging to : OBC (Non-creamy layer, as per the Central list of OBC available on website :
www.ncbc.nic.in) Patna High Court CWJC No.10283 of 2021(2) dt.02-09-2022 4/7 SC/ST/PwD/Transgender categories and to women applicants. Relaxation will also be provided to the candidates with research experience, limited to the period spent on research in the relevant/related subject of post-graduation degree, subject to a maximum of 5 years, on production of a certificate from appropriate authority. Three years relaxation in age will be permissible to the candidates with L.L.M. Degree. Relaxation of upto 5 years is provided to the candidates who have served in the armed forces subject to the length of service in the armed forces upto the first day of the month in which the concerned UGC NET is to be held. Total age relaxation on the above ground(s) shall not exceed five years under any circumstances.
b) Assistant Professor :
"There is no upper age limit for applying for Assistant Professor".
8. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per the information bulletin of June, 2019 UGC-NET notified by the National Testing Agency, the age limit and relaxation was provided as under :
Patna High Court CWJC No.10283 of 2021(2) dt.02-09-2022 5/7 "The candidates, in their own interest, must ensure themselves about their eligibility for the Test. In the event of any ineligibility being detected by the UGC/NTA at any stage, their candidature will be cancelled and they shall be liable for legal action. National Testing Agency does not verify the information provided by the candidates during online registration and hence candidature will be purely provisional subject to the fulfillment of eligibility criteria."
9. Learned counsel therefore submits that the petitioner was having full knowledge that he was above 35 years and was ineligible to apply for JRF. He therefore can not take advantage of h is own wrong. Learned counsel for the petitioner however submits that he was not conveyed of being over age at the time when he cleared the examination and has been declared passed only thereafter to be over age for JRF.
10. I have considered the submissions noted above.
11. UGC has an absolute right to lay down the qualification, age criteria for the purpose of the examination of JRF/NET.
12. The criteria laid down in the advertisement limiting the age to maximum 35 years after providing all kinds of relaxation is not under challenge before this Court. The petitioner was having full knowledge at the time of submitting Patna High Court CWJC No.10283 of 2021(2) dt.02-09-2022 6/7 application form that he is over age and he again therefore turned around and say that because now he has passed the examination he should be allowed the benefit.
13. In (2019) 8 SCC, 67, Municipal Corporation, New Delhi Vrs. Surender Singh & Ors., Supreme Court has held as under :
From a perusal of the said Clause it is noticed that though under the very Clause there is no cutoff marks specified, Clause 25 would, however, provide the full discretion to the DSSSB to fix the minimum qualifying marks for selection. In the instant case, keeping in view that the recruitment was for the post of Assistant Teacher (Primary) and also taking note of the orders passed by the High Court in an earlier petition requiring the maintenance of minimum standards, the DSSSB while preparing the select list had stopped the selection at a point which was indicated as the cutoff percentage. In a circumstance where Clause 25 was depicted in the Advertisement No.1/2006, when the private respondents herein and the other petitioners before the High Court were responding to the said Advertisement, if at all they had a grievance that the Clause is arbitrary and might affect their right ultimately since no minimum marks that is to be obtained has been indicated therein, they were required to assail the same at that stage. On the other hand, despite being aware of the Clause providing discretion to DSSSB to fix the Patna High Court CWJC No.10283 of 2021(2) dt.02-09-2022 7/7 minimum qualifying marks, they have participated in the selection process by appearing for the qualifying examination without raising any protest. In that circumstance, the principle of approbate and reprobate would apply and the private respondents herein or any other candidate who participated in the process cannot be heard to complain in that regard.
14. Thus the petitioner can not be allowed to approbate and reprobate. He was having knowledge that he is more than 35 years on the cutt-off date hence ineligible for JRF. Merely because of participating in the examination and clearing the same, no right is created to obtain a certificate as JRF.
15. The writ petition is misconceived and is accordingly dismissed.
(Sanjeev Prakash Sharma, J) Shamshad/-
Item No. 23 U