Himachal Pradesh High Court
Lalit Kumar vs Hp University & Ors on 3 April, 2024
Bench: Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Sushil Kukreja
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA.
LPA No. 99 of 2021
.
Date of decision: 3.04.2024
Lalit Kumar ...Appellant
Versus
HP University & ors. ...Respondents
Coram
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge.
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sushil Kukreja, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting? No
For the Appellant: Mr. Vivek Singh Attri, Advocate.
For the Respondents: Mr. Nitin Thakur, Advocate, for
respondents No.1 to 3-HPU.
Mr. Karan Singh Parmar, Advocate,
for respondent No.4.
Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Judge (Oral)
The appellant, aggrieved by the dismissal of his writ petition, has filed the instant Letters Patent Appeal.
2. The brief facts of the case are as under:-
a. That the respondent-University vide advertisement No. 03/2011 advertised various posts to be occupied by the eligible candidates through inviting application as per the prescribed qualifications including one post of Information Scientist (Library) in the pay scale of Rs. 2200-4000 ::: Downloaded on - 09/04/2024 20:32:01 :::CIS 2 (UGC). The last date for submission of the application to the post of Information Scientist .
(Library) as per the notification so as to reach to the respondent University was 25/11/2011.
b. That the requisite qualification prescribed for the post of Information Scientist (Library) at the relevant time was as under:
i. B.E. (Computer) ii. Master degree in Computer Application (MCA) OR iii. Master's degree in Library and Information Science (M.Lib.I.Sc.) and Post Graduate diploma in Computer Application (PGDCA) OR iv. Bachelor's degree in Library and Information Science (B.Lib. or B.Lib. I.Sc.) with three years' experience in the field and post Graduate Diploma in Computer Application (PGDCA) All degrees/diplomas shall be from recognized University/Institution with minimum 55% marks.
c. That the appellant being eligible, applied for the post of Information Scientist (Library) and accordingly respondent-University called the appellant for the interview to the same post to be held on 17/10/2012.
::: Downloaded on - 09/04/2024 20:32:01 :::CIS 3d. That the appellant consequent to the call letter dated 3rd October 2012 appeared on .
17/10/2012 before the respondent No.2 committee constituted for the purpose of interview to the post of Information Scientist (Library).
3. The Committee submitted its recommendation on 17.10.2012 itself by recommending the name of respondent No.4. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner approached the Writ Court for the grant of following substantive reliefs:-
"a) That the recommendation made by respondent No.2 vide Annexure A/3, wherein name of respondent No.4 has been recommended at serial No.1 to the post of Information Scientist Library, may kindly be set aside and consequently acceptance to such recommendation by respondent No.3 vide Annexure A/4 may kindly be set aside.
b) That the respondents may kindly be directed to issue appointment letter to the applicant being at Serial No.2 in merit list/select list prepared by respondent No.2, Annexure A/3, without any delay with all consequential benefits.
c) That the respondents may kindly be restrained from canceling the recruitment process to the post of Information Scientist Library advertised by advertisement No. 03/2011."::: Downloaded on - 09/04/2024 20:32:01 :::CIS 4
4. The respondents have filed their reply and the .
long and short of the same is that they had recommended the name of respondent No.4 solely on the basis of merit after verifying the validity, genuineness, proof and authenticity of the documents submitted by her.
5. As observed above, the Writ Court dismissed the petition filed by the appellant and aggrieved thereby, the petitioner-appellant has filed the instant appeal.
6. We have heard Shri Vivek Singh Attri, Advocate for the petitioner, who has re-iterated all the grounds, as raised before the Writ Court. We have also heard learned counsel appearing for the respondents and gone through the record of the case.
7. It is once again reiterated by Shri Vivek Singh Attri, Advocate that the name of respondent No.4 for being appointed against the post of Information Scientist (Library) was without verifying the validity and genuineness of the documents submitted by respondent No.4 and such recommendations have been made by ignoring the provisions of the Act and Ordinance of the H.P. University. He is at pains to refer to Ordinance 3.3(a)(1), in terms whereof, no student ::: Downloaded on - 09/04/2024 20:32:01 :::CIS 5 shall be allowed to join two full time regular degree courses of study simultaneously. According to him, respondent No.4 .
could not have completed M.A (English) and Master's of Computer Applications simultaneously and besides this, the time period for doing B.Tech degree is also overlapping, which he had obtained from IGNOU.
8. However, these contentions do not appear to be factually correct, because respondents No.1 to 3 have categorically found that respondent No.4 had completed B.A in April, 2003 and thereafter, joined M.A (English) in July, 2003 and appeared in the final semester, i.e., 4th semester in June, 2005. She completed M.A (English) in November, 2006 as a private candidate and thereafter, improved her scores in June, 2007.
9. As regards the course in Master's of Computer Applications (MCA), which is of three years duration, she took admission after she had appeared in the 4th semester exam of M.A (English) in June, 2005 and completed the said course in June, 2008 from IGNOU.
10. As regards the Bachelor's of Information Technology (BIT) course, she had done the course through ::: Downloaded on - 09/04/2024 20:32:01 :::CIS 6 correspondence in December, 2006 from IGNOU, as a correspondence student.
.
11. It was the specific case of respondents No.1 to 3 that respondent No.4 had not completed two degree courses simultaneously as alleged except BIT correspondence course from IGNOU, for which there was no restriction from the respondent-University.
12. The matter appears to have been re-agitated contankerously by the petitioner before the Writ Court, as is evident from the order dated 29.7.2021, which reads as under:-
"Heard further.
The contention of learned Counsel of the petitioner is that as the private respondent has passed her M.A. in English in the year 2007 only, therefore, by no stretch of imagination, she could have passed her MCA in the year 2008 because she cannot do two Post Graduation courses simultaneously. He has relied upon "1 st Ordinance of Himachal Pradesh University in general and Ordinance 3.3(a) in particular", which provides that no student shall be allowed to join two full time degree courses simultaneously.
Prima facie, in the considered view of he Court, the term 'simultaneously' as contained in ordinance 3.3(a) of the respondent- University, will imply that a candidate cannot take admission in two full time regular degree courses at the same time or in the same academic year(s), but from the contents of said ordinance, it cannot be deciphered that there is a bar that a candidate, who takes admission in one Post Graduation course, ::: Downloaded on - 09/04/2024 20:32:01 :::CIS 7 cannot take admission in another Post Graduation course without first clearing the course, which has been earlier joined by the candidate, though the period of the course is .
otherwise over. This observation the Court is making for the reasons that it is not in dispute that after the private respondent completed her Graduation in the year 2003, she joined her Post Graduation Course, i.e. M.A. in English, in the year 2003, duration of which was two years and she joined MCA course in the year 2005, i.e. after the duration of M.A. course was otherwise over.
In this backdrop, a query was put to learned Counsel representing the respondent- University that where is the bar contained in the ordinance or otherwise by the respondent- University to the effect that a person who has joined a particular Post Graduation course, cannot join another course without fully completing the first course within the duration concerned.
Learned Counsel for the respondent- University submits that he may be granted some time to assist the Court on this issue.
As prayed for, list for continuation on 03.08.2021 on which date, some responsible officer from the respondent-University shall remain present in the Court with relevant Statute/Ordinance/Regulation etc. to assist the Court."
13. This was followed by another order dated 3.8.2021, which reads as under:-
"In response to order dated 29.07.2021, learned counsel for the respondents-University, on instructions received from Additional Controller of Examination, informs the Court that there is no bar upon a candidate joining another Post Graduation Course in case term of the earlier Post Graduation Course being ::: Downloaded on - 09/04/2024 20:32:01 :::CIS 8 undertaken by the candidate is over, through he may not have successfully cleared the same, provided seeking admission in another course is on the strength of his/her graduation .
qualification. Statement of learned counsel for the respondents/ University is taken on record. He is instructed to file an affidavit of the competent authority to this effect. As prayed for, list for consideration on 05.08.2021."
14. In compliance to the aforesaid direction, Additional Controller of Examination of the respondent-
University then filed its affidavit dated 4.8.2021, which is reproduced herein under:-
".... Compliance affidavit in sequel to the order dated 03.08.2021 passed by the Hon'ble Court I Dr. Ashok Kumar Tiwari S/o Sh. Deo Nath Tiwari aged 58 years, R/o Flat No. 6, Block-B Kufta Dhar, Shimla-3, presently working as Additional Controller of Examinations Himachal Pradesh University, being competent officer do hereby solemnly affirms and declares as under:-
1. That the above said matter was listed before the Hon'ble court for hearing on dated 29.07.2021, and during the course of arguments a specific query was put to the counsel representing university "that where is the bar contained in the ordinance or otherwise by the respondent University to the effect that a person who has joined a particular Post Graduation course, cannot join another course without fully completing the first course within the duration concerned".
2. That in pursuance to the order passed by the Hon'ble court, the provision contained in the First Ordinance of Himachal Pradesh ::: Downloaded on - 09/04/2024 20:32:01 :::CIS 9 University in general and ordinance 3.3(a) which is relevant is examined at length.
3. That after examination of the .
abovementioned relevant provision it is submitted that there is no such bar in the ordinance and a student can join another Post Graduate course without completing previous post graduate course after ensuing regular appearance in all the semester in the stipulated duration of the course.
4. That on dated 03.08.2021 the said matter was again listed before the Hon'ble Court, and the counsel representing the respondent University on instructions apprized the Hon'ble Court that there is no such bar contained in the ordinance or otherwise by the respondent University to the effect that a person who joined a particular Post Graduation course, cannot join another course without fully completing the first course within the duration concerned. That the Hon'ble Court after taken the statement of the counsel for University on record further directed the University to file an affidavit on the competent authority to this effect.
That the contents of the abovementioned affidavit contained in para 1 to 4 are correct and true to the best of my personal knowledge as derived from the record and nothing material has been concealed therefrom."
15. Now in case Ordinance 3.3(a)(1) of the H.P. University is perused, the same only prohibits joining of two full time regular degree courses of study simultaneously, as is evident from the provision itself, which is reproduced herein under:-
"3.3(a):1. No student shall be allowed to join two full time regular degree courses of study ::: Downloaded on - 09/04/2024 20:32:01 :::CIS 10 simultaneously. However, student shall be allowed to join the following certificates/ diplomas/postgraduate diplomas/advanced postgraduate diploma courses, alongwith .
regular courses including Ph.D. i)
Certificate/diploma courses in Foreign
Languages (German, French and
Russian)/PGDPM & LW. ii) Certificate in Computer Application. iii) Certificate in Computer Programming. iv) Any other part time certificate/diploma/post-graduate diploma/advanced post-graduate diploma degree courses may be introduced by the University or through ICDEOL in future."
16. As already observed above, respondent No.4 had not simultaneously joined two full time regular degree courses of study and even third course as undergone by the petitioner was through correspondence from IGNOU, for which there was no bar either in the provisions of the University Act, the UGC or for that matter even by the IGNOU.
17. The position stands clarified in the affidavit filed by the Additional Controller of Examination and that should have been sufficient enough for the appellant to have not agitated the matter any further. Yet for some reason the petitioner has again approached this Court by filing the instant appeal which to say the least is devoid of any merit.
18. In view of the aforesaid discussion and for the reasons stated above, we find no merit in this appeal and the same is accordingly dismissed leaving the parties to bear their ::: Downloaded on - 09/04/2024 20:32:01 :::CIS 11 own costs. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stands disposed of.
.
(Tarlok Singh Chauhan)
Judge
(Sushil Kukreja)
3rd April, 2024 Judge
(mamta)
r to
::: Downloaded on - 09/04/2024 20:32:01 :::CIS