Kerala High Court
Sreenanda G vs Mahatma Gandhi University on 19 December, 2019
Equivalent citations: AIR 2020 (NOC) 446 (KER.), AIRONLINE 2019 KER 709
Author: Shaji P.Chaly
Bench: Shaji P.Chaly
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY
THURSDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2019 / 28TH AGRAHAYANA, 1941
WP(C).No.29922 OF 2019(M)
PETITIONER:
SREENANDA G.
AGED 23 YEARS
D/O. S GOPALAKRISHNAN NAIR,
SRAVANAM HOUSE, MOOLAMATTOM POST,
PIN-685589, IDUKKI DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.P.K.RAVISANKAR
RESPONDENTS:
1 MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY
REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR,
PRIYADARSINI HILLS POST,
KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN-686560.
2 REGISTRAR,
MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY,PRIYADARSINI HILLS POST,
KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN-686560.
3 CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATIONS,
MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, PRIYADARSINI HILLS POST,
KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN-686560.
R1 BY SRI.ASOK M. CHERIAN, SC, M.G. UNIVERSITY
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
19.12.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.29922 OF 2019(M) 2
J U D G M E N T
This writ petition is filed by the petitioner, a Post Graduate in Zoology, seeking the following reliefs:
i) Call for the records leading to Ext.P7 and issue a writ in the nature of certiorari, order or direction quashing Ext.P7.
ii) issue a writ of mandamus, order or direction directing the respondents to permit the petitioner to participate in the selection process of Ph.D. Programme conducted by the respondents for the academic year 2019-20.
iii) Award cost of this proceedings and
iv) Pass such other orders as this Honourable Curt may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.
2. Brief material facts for the disposal of the writ petition are as follows; petitioner completed her Post Graduate Course in March, 2019 and appeared for examination during April, 2019. While so, Ext.P1 notification dated 18.4.2019 was issued by the M.G.University inviting applications from eligible candidates for entrance test for Ph.D. Programme in WP(C).No.29922 OF 2019(M) 3 various disciplines for the year 2019 and the petitioner submitted application, however, her result was withheld since the result of the P.G. examination was not declared at that time. The results of many 4 th semester P.G. examinations were declared by the respondents in May, 2019 itself. However, the P.G. Examination result of Zoology was announced by the respondent only on 28.9.2019.
3. However, as per Ext.P7 memo dated 26.6.2019 petitioner was informed that her application for registration for research is rejected as the petitioner does not qualify with Masters Degree and pass in Ph.D entrance test on 31.7.2019 (I think the date of Ext.P7 is a mistake and it could be only 26.7.2019). According to the petitioner, the delayed publication of result by the University is not the fault of the petitioner and further that, in accordance with Chapter 16 of the M.G.University Statutes, 1997 (hereinafter called 'Statutes, 1997') admission to Ph.D. Programme can be made without the publication of result of the Post Graduate course and therefore, the action on the part of the respondents WP(C).No.29922 OF 2019(M) 4 as per Ext.P7 rejecting the candidature of the petitioner on the ground that the Masters Degree and pass in Ph.D. Entrance test was not produced by the petitioner on 31.7.2019, which is only the cut-off date fixed as per Ext.P1 notification for submission of the application, is illegal and irrational.
4. A statement is filed for and on behalf of the respondent University, wherein it is contended that, the 4th semester examination for elective courses in M.Sc - Zoology were originally scheduled during May, 2019. The practicals for IVth semester were conducted on 19.6.2019 and 21.6.2019. Subsequently the viva-voce was conducted on 8.7.2019 and result was published on 28.9.2019, evident from Exts.P5 & P6 produced by the petitioner, which implies that examination session was during May,2019. Therefore, the date of qualifying examination is the date of publication of result i.e., 28.9.2019. The University conducted the entrance examination for Ph.D. Programme on 18.4.2019 for which candidates awaiting their results of Post Graduate Examination were permitted to apply. But it is imperative that, they WP(C).No.29922 OF 2019(M) 5 shall qualify their Post Graduate degree on or before 31.7.2019, which is a condition prescribed in the notification in the light of the provisions contained in the Statues, 1997. The result of the entrance examination was published on 27.6.2019 and the result of the petitioner was withheld, awaiting petitioner acquiring the qualification on or before 31.7.2019. It is also pointed out that, the claim raised by the petitioner that, she was qualified in the entrance test is incorrect as result withheld does not mean either qualified or not qualified. Other legal contentions are raised which will be discussed hereafter. Therefore, according to the respondent University, petitioner is not entitled to join for the Ph.D. Programme during the academic year 2019- 2020 and petitioner is at liberty to apply for the same during the ensuing year.
5. I have heard learned counsel for petitioner Sri.P.K.Ravi Sankar, learned Standing Counsel for University Sri.Ashok M. Cherian and perused the pleadings and documents on record.
6. Respective counsel addressed their arguments WP(C).No.29922 OF 2019(M) 6 in accordance with the pleadings put forth. In the Statutes, 1997, Statute 3 of chapter 16 deals with Degree of Master of Science (By examination) which stipulates that, candidates for the Degree of Master of Science (M.Sc) shall be required to have taken the Bachelor of Science Degree of the University or a degree of any other University recognised by the University as equivalent thereto, and to have subsequently undergone the prescribed course of study for a period of not less than two academic years in a college or the University and passed the Master of Science Degree Examination conducted by the University. Petitioner is entitled to apply for Ph.D. programme in accordance with Statute 3 specified above. However, reliance is placed by the petitioner in Statute 4 to canvass the proposition that, the qualification for the Post Graduate Degree is necessitated only when the doctorate is awarded to the petitioner and therefore, publication of the result after the cut-off date, 31.7.2019 is not a adverse consequence to pursue the Ph.D. programme.
7. Statute 4 deals with Degree of Master of WP(C).No.29922 OF 2019(M) 7 Science (By Research). Clause 1 thereto stipulates that the degree of Master of Science may be awarded to persons holding the degree of Bachelor of Science of the University or degree of any other university recognised by the University as equivalent thereto on the result of research work extending over a period of not less than three years after passing the examination qualifying them for the Bachelor's Degree, undertaken under the guidance of a Supervising Teacher approved by the Syndicate in an institution of the University or of any other University or an institute approved by the Syndicate on a subject within the purview of the Faculty of Science, who have complied with the conditions prescribed with regard to registration and submission of thesis and have passed the prescribed examination. Rest of the clauses of Statute 4 may not be relevant for the purpose of deciding the question raised by the petitioner.
8. On a reading of Statutes 3 & 4, it is clear that, the said provisions are governing different field of operation and the persons entitled to WP(C).No.29922 OF 2019(M) 8 participate in the Ph.D. Programme in accordance with Statute 4 are to secure the qualification as prescribed thereunder. Now petitioner relies on Statute 6 which deals with Degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Clause (1) thereto stipulates that Degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.) may be awarded as prescribed thereunder to persons holding the Master's Degree under any faculty of the University or of any other University recognised by the University as equivalent thereto, on the results of research work as embodied in a thesis relating to subjects coming within the purview of the Faculty of Science. Clause (a) deals with Master of Science by examination on the results of research work extending over a period of not less than three years after passing the examination qualifying them for the Master's Degree and undertaken under the guidance of a Supervising Teacher approved by the Syndicate in an institution of the University or of any other University or an institute approved by the Syndicate, who have complied with the provision prescribed thereunder with regard to registration and submission WP(C).No.29922 OF 2019(M) 9 of thesis and have passed the qualifying examination for the submission of the thesis prescribed in clause (5) of Statute 4 whereas Clause (b) deals with Master of Science by Research, on the results of further research work carried out in an approved institution extending over a period of not less than two years after the submission, of the thesis for which Master's Degree was awarded. Therefore, it can be seen that clauses (a) and (b) deals with candidates participating in the Ph.D. Programme as per Statutes 3 & 4 respectively. Clause 2 of Statute 6 is relevant which stipulates that a candidate shall be required to register himself as a research student and candidate for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy before the commencement of the course of research. The proviso stipulates that a candidate who possesses the Degree of Master of Science by Research may register at any time during the further period of his two years research work. Therefore, it gives a clear indication that, there is substantial difference by and between a candidate with Degree of Master of Science by examination and a candidate with Degree of WP(C).No.29922 OF 2019(M) 10 Master of Science by Research.
9. On a harmonious reading of Statute 6 along with the provisions discussed above, it is clear that, the candidate who possesses the degree of Master of Science by Research is alone entitled to register at any time during the further period of his two years research work. Anyhow Statute 6(3) deals with application for registration which stipulates that in order to register as a research student and candidate for the Ph.D. Degree, the application shall be made to the Head/Director of the University Teaching Department/School concerned on or before 31 st July, following notifications in this regard in April/May every year in the prescribed form and shall be accompanied by:-
(a) a diploma or certificate showing the academic qualifications of the applicant and such other evidence of attainments as will show his fitness to pursue the proposed course of research and details of previous study and research, if any. Other stipulations are contained thereunder in respect of the WP(C).No.29922 OF 2019(M) 11 particular regarding special subject in which the candidate intends to prosecute research, the name of a teacher of the university or any other supervisor recognised for the purpose by the Syndicate under whose guidance and supervision the candidate proposes to work accompanied by the written consent of the teacher etc. etc.
10. Therefore, one thing is clear that the cut- off date to submit the application along with the qualification documents is 31 st July of the year concerned, which is a mandatory statutory prescription. However, while assuming Ext.P1 notification, the statutory prescription as per Statute 6(3) was departed with by granting a relaxation to the candidates awaiting results of their Post Graduate examination to apply, but with the rider that, they shall qualify the Post Graduate degree on or before 31.7.2019. Which thus also means that the imperative condition of the Statute 6(3) to qualify on or before 31.7.2019 was in no way tinkered with.
WP(C).No.29922 OF 2019(M) 12
11. Be that as it may, petitioner heavily relies on Statute 6(5), which stipulates that the candidates for the Ph.D. Degree who have not previously qualified for the Degree of Master of Science by Research of the University shall be required to take within six months before the submission of the thesis, the qualifying examination for the submission of the thesis and only those who are declared successful in the qualifying examinations shall be permitted to submit the thesis. The qualifying examination shall be on the same lines as prescribed for the M.sc Degree by Research according to those subjects in which the candidates have registered. The standard required in the case of candidates for the Ph.D. Degree shall be higher than that for the M.Sc degree. No candidates shall be permitted to take the qualifying examination more than twice.
12. Therefore, on a conjoint reading of clause (b) of Statute 6(1) and clause 5 of Statute 6 discussed above, it is categoric and clear that, the said provisions deal with the candidates entitled to apply for the Ph.D programme in accordance with WP(C).No.29922 OF 2019(M) 13 Statute 4 i.e., by Research.
12. Therefore, in my considered opinion, the contention put forth by the petitioner that, petitioner is not liable to produce the qualification on or before 31.7.2019, the cut-off date fixed in the notification, in accordance with the provisions contained under Statute 6(3) cannot be sustained legally.
13. Therefore, in my considered opinion, the stand adopted by the University as per Ext.P7 cannot be said to be illegal or arbitrary justifying interference of this court. Moreover, when Statute prescribes particular modalities in the matter of consideration of the application to the Ph.D. Programme under different heads, the same will have to be strictly and scrupulously followed. It is also to my considered view that, the contention advanced by the petitioner that the result was published belatedly depriving opportunity to register for Ph.D. during the year 2019 is not a legal contention, since such eventualities are not statutorily protected. So also overlooking the mandatory stipulations for the WP(C).No.29922 OF 2019(M) 14 convenience of a candidate is not appropriate in academic matters. Learned counsel for petitioner has also raised the contention that whatever be the situation, a seat is kept vacant in the University. However, learned Standing Counsel for the University submitted that as per Ext.P1 notification dated 29.6.2019, research programmes are offered to various other categories in accordance with Statutes, 1997. Therefore, petitioner is not entitled to claim any seat remaining vacant for specific purposes as per the notification specified above.
Resultantly, writ petition fails, accordingly it is dismissed.
Sd/-
SHAJI P.CHALY
Smv JUDGE
20.12.2019
WP(C).No.29922 OF 2019(M) 15
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION O.10834/EB
10/2/2019/EB 10 DATED 18.04.2019 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION NO.E.H. XV/3/M.SC.M.B AND J.E/S4 APRIL 2019 DATED 18.5.2019 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 16/7/2019 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENTS EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 19.07.2019 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE VICE CHANCELLOR OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION NO.E.H.III/2/M.SC/RESULT/2019 DATED 28-9-2019 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE MARK LIST OF THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMO NO. ACXI/PH.D/2019 DATED 26.6.2019 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE ENVELOP THAT CONTAINED EXHIBIT P7 EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION NO.EBX/PH.D/ET/2019 DATED 27.6.2019 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
RESPONDENTS' ANNEXURE:
ANNEXURE I. A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION DATED 29.6.2019 INVITING ELIGIBLE CANDIDATES FOR REGISTRATION OF RESEARCH FOR THE YEAR 2019.