Punjab-Haryana High Court
Seema Rani vs Union Of India And Anr on 31 March, 2015
Author: Rakesh Kumar Jain
Bench: Rakesh Kumar Jain
CWP No.5974 of 2015 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
*****
CWP No.5974 of 2015
Date of Decision:31.03.2015
*****
Seema Rani
. . . .Petitioner
Versus
Union of India and another
. . . . Respondents
*****
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN
*****
Present: Mr.B.S. Mittal, Advocate,
for the petitioner.
*****
RAKESH KUMAR JAIN, J.
The respondent No.2 notified National Eligibility Test [for short 'the NET'] for determining the eligibility for Assistant Professor only or Junior Research Fellowship [for short 'the JRF'] and eligibility for Assistant Professor both in Indian Universities and Colleges.
The petitioner applied online for the NET held on 29.12.2013, in the category of Backward Class, under the Roll No.78010014, for the subject of Economics. It is alleged that initially she was declared pass for the Assistant Professor securing 58.29% but later on it was revised to 62.29%.
The case of the petitioner is that due to mistake on her part, she has chosen the option of Assistant Professor only though she wanted to choose option for both JRF and Assistant Professor. It is alleged that the cut off marks for the JRF (OBC category), as per UGC norms, are 61.14 % for the subject of Economics and the petitioner, having more than the cut off marks in the JRF, submitted VIVEK PAHWA 2015.04.08 16:14 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document CWP No.5974 of 2015 -2- a representation to respondent No.2 to allow her to convert her choice from Assistant Professor only to JRF.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that because of the unintentional mistake on the part of the petitioner, she should not be allowed to suffer as she has more marks in her category than the cut off of marks prescribed for JRF.
I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record.
In the instructions issued by respondent No.2, laying down the instructions for the examination, it was categorically mentioned that "before submission of the online application form, the candidate should read this notification carefully". It was also laid down that "however, the candidates qualifying exclusively for Assistant Professor will not be considered for award of JRF. Candidates appearing in NET should clearly specify in the prescribed application form whether they are applying for both JRF & Eligibility for Assistant Professor both OR only for Eligibility for Assistant Professor".
Once, it is categorically provided in the instructions that candidates qualifying exclusively for Assistant Professor will not be considered for award of JRF, the request made by the petitioner cannot be entertained because she had clearly opted for Assistant Professor only.
In view thereof, I do not find any merit in the present writ petition and the same is hereby dismissed.
(RAKESH KUMAR JAIN) 31.03.2015 JUDGE Vivek VIVEK PAHWA 2015.04.08 16:14 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document