Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Delhi High Court - Orders

Sakshi Semwal vs Union Of India & Anr on 5 December, 2023

Author: Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav

Bench: Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav

                                    $~35
                                    *    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                                    +    W.P.(C) 15477/2023 & CM APPL. 62051/2023
                                         SAKSHI SEMWAL                                    ..... Petitioner
                                                          Through: Mr.Omkar Shrivastava, Mr.Divyadeep
                                                          Chaturvedi and Mr.Ayush Jain, Advocates.

                                                                                      versus

                                        UNION OF INDIA & ANR.                       ..... Respondents
                                                      Through: Ms.Monika Arora, CGSC,
                                                      Mr.Subhrodreep Saha and Mr.Kaushal, Advocates
                                                      for R-1.
                                                      Mr.Kaushal Gautam, Ms.Vanshika Singh,
                                                      Mr.Snehpreet Kaure and Mr.Mrinal Sharma,
                                                      Advocates for R-2.
                                    CORAM:
                                    HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV
                                                      ORDER

% 05.12.2023

1. Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties.

2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent no.2 prays for some time to file the counter-affidavit.

3. Let the same be filed within seven working days. Rejoinder, if any, be filed within three working days thereafter.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the petitioner was admitted in Master of Fashion Management (M.F.M) course at NIFT, Kannur Campus for Academic Year 2023. However, after undergoing the course for some time, respondent no.2 vide impugned order dated 20.11.2023 cancelled the admission due to non-fulfilment of eligibility criteria.

5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner further submits This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 07/12/2023 at 03:26:20 -2- that the petitioner has a four year diploma certificate which has been certified to be equivalent to B.Des program offered by the Indian Institute of Craft and Design, Jaipur (hereinafter as 'IICD'). While placing reliance on certificate dated 04.12.2023 issued by the IICD, he submits that the current B.Des program is a four year undergraduate degree recognised by University Grants Commission (UGC). He, therefore, submits that till the matter is decided, the operation of impugned order dated 20.11.2023 be stayed and the petitioner be allowed to continue her course.

6. The submissions so made by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner is vehemently opposed by the learned counsel for the respondent(s).

7. Learned counsel for the respondent(s) submits that the petitioner claims her candidature in the category of 'Undergraduate degree in any discipline from any institute/University recognised by law in India'. He, therefore, submits that the petitioner, admittedly, is not possessing any degree in any discipline from any institute/university recognised by law in India. According to learned counsel for the respondent(s), the above said certificate is by an institute which is not authorised to confer any degree as per the provisions of the UGC Act, 1956. He indicates that the degrees are such, which are recognised under Section 22 of the said Act. According to him, when the petitioner lacks basic eligibility criteria, there is no point in passing any interim order and allowing her to continue her course.

8. I have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

9. It is to be noted that the petitioner at the threshold, submitted the This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 07/12/2023 at 03:26:20 -3- relevant documents claiming her candidature for consideration of admission in the concerned course. As per the prospectus of respondent no.2 the eligibility or non-eligibility of the candidate should be adjudged at the threshold, i.e. at the stage of scrutiny of their online application. It is, thus seen that if a candidate is not eligible for grant of admission, he/she must be eliminated at the threshold, so that the concerned candidate may pursue the appropriate recourse in accordance with law.

10. In the instant case, the petitioner was admitted for the concerned course and has studied for about two months. It is not the case of the respondent(s) that the petitioner has submitted any fake certificate or has suppressed any relevant information. It is also to be noted that the respondent no.2 in its email communication dated 25.08.2023 required the petitioner to provide an equivalence certificate from the Association of Indian Universities (AIU) on or before 30.09.2023.

11. When the petitioner contacted AIU, it was informed to her that the AIU only deals with the certificates for the degree/diploma which are obtained from foreign universities.

12. The petitioner, therefore, submitted that the available recourse was to obtain equivalence certificate from the concerned institute, wherefrom, she underwent the concerned undergraduate course. She, therefore, submits that concerned institute has already given her the certificate of equivalence, therefore, there is no reason to deny the continuation of the concerned course.

13. The aforesaid facts indicate that the matter requires greater scrutiny. At this stage, this court deems it appropriate to stay the operation of the This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 07/12/2023 at 03:26:21 -4- impugned communicated dated 20.11.2023 and directs respondent no.2 to allow the petitioner to appear in the ensuing examination.

14. However, it is directed that this interim order shall remain in force subject to further directions to be passed by this court, once the counter- affidavit is filed by respondent no.2 and the matter is fully heard.

15. It is also directed that the result of the petitioner shall not be declared without the leave of this court.

16. List on 20.12.2023.

17. Dasti.

PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J DECEMBER 5, 2023/MJ/kv This is a digitally signed order.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 07/12/2023 at 03:26:21