Bombay High Court
Ketan V. Kadam vs The Director Tata Institute Of Social ... on 27 October, 2020
Equivalent citations: AIRONLINE 2020 BOM 2809
Author: G.S.Kulkarni
Bench: G.S.Kulkarni
2 wp [email protected](IANo.49612020).odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (lodg) No.4955 OF 2020 with INTERIM APPLICATION (L.) NO.4961 OF 2020 Ketan V. Kadam ... Petitioner/Applicant Versus The Director, Tata Institute of Social Science (TISS) & Ors. ... Respondents ..... Mr.C.K. Thomas i/b. C.K. Thomas & Associates for Petitioner/ Applicant. Mr.Darius Khambata with Mrs.Naira Jejeebhoy, Mr.S.D.Shetty and Mr.Arsh Misra i/b. M.V. Kini & Co. for Respondent Nos.1 & 2 (TISS). Mr.Rui Rodrigues with Mr.Atul Singh for Respondent No.3 (UOI). ..... CORAM : DIPANKAR DATTA CJ & G.S.KULKARNI, J.
DATED : OCTOBER 27, 2020. P.C. :
1. The petitioner an aspirant for the M.A. course to be conducted by respondent no.1-Tata Institute of Social Science (for short "TISS") for the academic years 2020-2022, is before the Court making a grievance in regard to the selection and Prashant Rane 1/17 2 wp [email protected](IANo.49612020).odt admission process conducted by the TISS. The petition as filed is not only in the petitionerss own interest but also espousing the cause of 49 other candidates. No leave under Order I Rule 8 of the Civil Procedure Code is sought to file this petition in a representative capacity.
2. The relevant facts are required to be noted:
In October,2019 TISS invited applications for admission to the diferent M.A. courses for the academic years 2020-22. The M.A.Courses are conducted by the TISS interalia at its Mumbai campus. TISS is a deemed university established under Section 3 of the University Grant Commission Act,1956. TISS notified a selection procedure which was to be undertaken in three diferent stages. 'Stage Is being a common screening test for shortlisting the candidates based on diferential cut-of for diferent programmes. The score in the common screening test was to be used only for shortlisting the candidates. 'Stage IIs was to be a pre-interview test and personal interview (PIT and PI) which was stated to be programme specific having variations across diferent programmes. Some of the programmes were to have Group Prashant Rane 2/17 2 wp [email protected](IANo.49612020).odt Discussions (GD) or Aptitude Test (AT) as part of pre-interview test. The scores for PIT and PI were to be aggregated in the ratio 70:30 for final selection. Thereafter preparation of programme wise Open (Unreserved) Merit List (OML) was to be prepared on the basis of aggregate score and the candidatess preference of programmes as made in the online application form. OML was to be prepared without consideration of the category to which the candidates belonged, thereby providing opportunity for all candidates to get selected in the OML depending on their aggregate score.
Thereafter, considering all the candidates in the OML, separate category wise merit list (CML) was to be drawn for the number of seats reserved for each category as per the Government of India/University Grants Commission regulations. There was also a provision for wait list. The score of each candidate could also be viewed by the candidate.
3. The selection procedure as per the above programme was set into motion however the same could not be completed due to the outbreak of COVID-19 pandemic in March 2020.
Prashant Rane 3/17
2 wp [email protected](IANo.49612020).odt
4. TISS in such situation, on May 24, 2020 issued a notification informing the candidates that the Stage II of the admission process, was required to be stopped in the middle, due to the outbreak of COVID-19 pandemic and the unprecedented national lockdown. The candidates were informed that TISS had planned to restart the admission process from early June. It was stated that in view of the public health concerns and the mobility challenges due to travel restrictions, it was decided to restructure the admission process. The restructured admission process was also notified which interalia provided that all processes requiring the candidates to physically visit the TISS campuses for the admission procedure, being restructured, the candidates were not required to travel to the TISS campuses for completing admission processes. It was provided that the process will be completed via online mode. Stage II of admission was now to consist of only a personal interview (PI) and the pre-interview test (PIT) was not to be administered. The weightages for diferent components were reallocated in the following manner:-
Prashant Rane 4/17
2 wp [email protected](IANo.49612020).odt "i. TISS-NET :60% (for HRM and ODCL programmes the score will be combined of TISS NET and TISS MAT in 40:20 ratio) ii. PI:40%"
It was provided that for all candidates who have already attended PIT and PI at the Mumbai Campus, their respective scores for PIT would be discarded and only their TISS-Net and PI scores would be considered for final assessment. It was further provided that those candidates who are yet to undergo the PI process would be required to appear for a personal interview remotely using online platforms. The details of individual PI schedules were to be communicated to the candidates. As per the revised schedule, the personal interviews for Mumbai were to be held between June 8 - 17, 2020. Announcement of the 1st merit list was to be on July 20, 2020 and the academic session was to begin on August 3, 2020.
5. The case of the petitioner is that there were various discrepancies in the revised admission process. It is contended that the changes which were brought about by the notification dated May 24, 2020 modified the admission Prashant Rane 5/17 2 wp [email protected](IANo.49612020).odt pattern to the prejudice of those who had appeared for the TISS-NET and personal interview (PI), prior to such changes being notified. The petitioner contends that as the TISS-NET examination did not have weightage in the composition of final merit list, this was discriminatory to the students who were part of the admission procedure undertaken prior to the notification dated May 24, 2020. The grievance of the petitioner is also that a merit list was not notified. If it was to be notified, it would go to show that meritorious candidates were not selected. The petitioner, accordingly, made a representation to the TISS. The petitioner contends that the TISS acknowledged that there were certain discrepancies, however it was stated that corrective measures were taken in regard to some courses as informed to the candidates by its communication dated July 23, 2020.
6. The case of the petitioner is thus that the selection process carried out by the TISS is in violation of the rules as notified. It is illegal and arbitrary. The selection procedure is in violation of principles of natural justice. The TISS ought to have issued a list of candidates who have applied alongwith their TISS-NET and PIT categorywise, also a merit list Prashant Rane 6/17 2 wp [email protected](IANo.49612020).odt categorywise was also required to be notified. These are the contentions as set out in ground (B) of the petition.
7. On the above backdrop, the petitioner has prayed that the entire selection and admission process conducted by TISS for the various streams/courses of MA for the academic years 2020-22 be quashed and a fresh uniform selection process be undertaken. The prayers are quite wide, which are required to be noted:-
(a) this Honsble Court be pleased to issue a writ of Certiorari or any appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari and direct the Respondents to produce the relevant papers and proceedings relating to the MA selection and admission procedure in various streams/courses for the academic year 2020-22 and after verifying the legality, validity and proprietary thereof, this Honsble Court be pleased to pass an appropriate order and direction to quash the entire selection and admission process conducted by the Respondent No.1 in the various streams/courses of MA for the academic year 2020-22 and further to direct the Respondent No.1 to carry out a fresh uniform selection process on online for all the candidates who have qualified the TISS NET.
(b) that pending the hearing and final disposal of the above Writ Petition this Honsble Court be pleased to forthwith stay (i) the MA selection and admission procedure in various streams/courses for the academic year 2020-22 and (ii) further pleased to direct the Respondent No.1 to carry out a fresh uniform selection process on online for all the candidates who have qualified the TISS NET for the academic year 2020-22."
8. The case of the TISS in the reply afdavits is that the petitioner is estopped from challenging the admission Prashant Rane 7/17 2 wp [email protected](IANo.49612020).odt process as undertaken by the TISS as the petitioner had admittedly participated in the admission process and chose not to raise any objection or challenge at the relevant time. It is contended that the petitioner has challenged the admission process only after the results were declared and when he failed to gain admission to the M.A. programme. It is contended that the petition is also vitiated by delay and laches, as there are 1280 students who are selected and admitted. The online classes were to commence from August 17, 2020, the petitioner, however, waited till August 8, 2020 to file the petition. It is next contended that the prayers as made in the petition are misconceived inasmuch as the petitioner has prayed for setting aside of the entire selection process for the MA Courses, without impleading the candidates who would be adversely afected, namely the admitted candidates.
9. In so far as the petitioner is concerned, the TISS has contended that the petitioner was amongst the 297 applicants who applied for admission to the M.A. (Regulatory Governance) course. Out of the 297 candidates, 265 candidates including the petitioner attended TISS-NET Prashant Rane 8/17 2 wp [email protected](IANo.49612020).odt (entrance test) from which 210 candidates including the petitioner were shortlisted for the Pre-interview test and Personal Interview. Out of these 210 candidates, only 10 candidates have been finally selected under general category to which the petitioner belongs. The petitioner was placed in the 26th position with wait list position at 16, hence, 15 candidates were above him after the last admitted candidate under the general category. TISS has contended that the petitioner hence did not stand any chance, of getting selected for the said programme. It is next contended that the petitioner has no locus to maintain the petition when he seeks to quash the entire admission and selection process in various streams as he applied for only one course that is to the course of M.A. (Regulatory Governance). The TISS contends that the petition is also totally vague in regard to 49 aspirants students on whose behalf the petition is filed, as there is nothing to indicate that any of the 49 aspirant students have authorised the petitioner to file the petition on their behalf. TISS has also contended that the petition appears to be motivated as it is quite clear from the petition that the student wing of a political party is behind the present Prashant Rane 9/17 2 wp [email protected](IANo.49612020).odt petition, hence, it is necessary that it be verified whether the petition is an individual petition or filed at the behest of someone for extraneous reasons. TISS says that this is more evident from the fact that the petitioner who aspired only for one course, has sought to challenge the selection process for all the M.A. courses.
10. TISS has next contended that due to COVID 19 pandemic, modification of the admission process was necessarily required to be undertaken and for which the UGC had no objection. It is contended that the admissions were made as per merit and wherever there were some lacunae in the admission process, they were rectified and grievances redressed.
11. On the reply afdavit as filed on behalf of the TISS, the petitioner in his rejoinder afdavit has again raised grievances on the selection and admission procedure and principally on non-preparation of the merit list and it being not notified.
12. During the course of hearing, learned Counsel for the petitioner stated that he would confine the petition to the Prashant Rane 10/17 2 wp [email protected](IANo.49612020).odt admission of the petitioner to the M.A.(Regulatory Governance) course. By our order dated October 22, 2020, we had recorded a statement on behalf of TISS that a merit list prepared by the institute for admission to M.A. (Regulatory Governance) course be displayed on the website. We observed that this would take care of the grievance of the petitioner that the merit list being not published. The petition was hence adjourned for hearing on October 27, 2020. The merit list for the said course was displayed and a copy of the same was made available to the petitionerss Advocate.
13. At todayss hearing on our query as made to Mr.Thomas, learned Advocate for the petitioner, as to whether his client has any grievance with regard to the merit list, Mr.Thomas, on instructions, has answered in the negative. Mr.Thomas however states that the petitioner would confine his case on the petitionerss contention of irregularity in the admission procedure. Mr.Thomas submits that the admission procedure was discriminatory. In supporting this contention, Mr.Thomas would refer to the admission procedure as contained in Rule 11.0 of the UGC (Institutions Deemed to be Universities) Regulations,2019. This rule provides for Prashant Rane 11/17 2 wp [email protected](IANo.49612020).odt "admission and fee structure." Mr.Thomas would submit that sub-rule 11.03 thereunder would postulate that admission of student to an institution deemed to be University, shall be strictly based on merit in the entrance examination prescribed by the appropriate statutory authority and in the manner specified in the prospectus, in case no entrance examination is prescribed. He submits that there is violation of this requirement of Sub Rule 11.03. Mr.Thomas would submit that it is on the ground of irregularity in the admission procedure, the reliefs as prayed for are required to be granted.
14. On the other hand Mr.Khambata, learned Senior Counsel for TISS has drawn our attention to the case of the TISS as contained in the pleadings. Mr.Khambata would submit that the petitioner cannot have any grievance on the admission process, inasmuch as there was no chance for the petitioner to get selected and admitted as per his merit. He next submits that the petition is not bonafide, considering the frame of the petition. It is submitted that the prayers are totally misconceived and cannot be granted if the petitionerss case as pleaded in the petition is considered and more particularly when the petitioner himself could not succeed to Prashant Rane 12/17 2 wp [email protected](IANo.49612020).odt gain admission as per his merit. He accordingly prayed that the petition be dismissed.
15. We have heard the learned Counsel for the parties. We would at the outset note that the prayers as made in the petition are extremely wide. The petitioner wants that the entire selection and admission process under which about 1280 admissions to the diferent M.A. courses, be quashed and set aside. This more particularly when the petitioner is an aspirant only for one course that is the M.A. (Regulatory Governance) course.
16. The question is as to whether any case is made out by the petitioner for the Court to consider the wide reliefs as prayed for. It is not in dispute that the admission and selection procedure for M.A. courses for the academic year 2020-2022 was mid-way when there was outbreak of COVID 19 pandemic. It cannot be disputed that it was not possible for the candidates to physically participate in the selection process as notified earlier in October 2019. Hence, a restructured selection process was required to be notified by the TISS, which came to be informed by the TISS by its Prashant Rane 13/17 2 wp [email protected](IANo.49612020).odt notification dated May 24, 2020. By this notification, online admission process was proposed. A procedure was also deviced to bring about compatibility and equivalence between the non-online and the online applicants, that is, those candidates who appeared for the entrance examination and those who would be undertaking online procedure, were brought at par. The changed admission process was set into motion and was completed by mid of July 2020. The academic session also was to commence from August 3, 2020. It is not in dispute that the TISS had completed the admissions and academic curriculum had already commenced by virtue of online classes being undertaken since August,2020. The total admissions are more than about 1300.
17. Now coming to the case of the petitioner, he is an aspirant only for the M.A.(Regulatory Governance) Course. It appears to be not in dispute that the petitioner could not qualify as per his merit for admission to the said course. Candidates who were well above him came to be admitted. Even in the waiting list the petitioner is listed at Sr.no.16. This position being indisputed, we are afraid as to how the petitioner can mount a challenge to set aside the entire Prashant Rane 14/17 2 wp [email protected](IANo.49612020).odt selection process of admission to all the M.A. courses. There is also much substance in the contention of the TISS that the petitioner having participated and having not challenged the notification dated May 24, 2020 under which a modified admission procedure was set into motion, now cannot turn around and challenge the admission process.
18. The principal grievance of the petitioner is in regard to the merit list not being notified. By our order dated October 22, 2020, we had directed TISS to provide merit list to the petitioner. Mr.Thomas for the petitioner has made a categorical statement that his client has no grievance in regard to the merit list. If that be the case, in our opinion, the petitioner can have no grievance in regard to the admission procedure as undertaken by the TISS for admission to the M.A. (Regulatory Governance) course on the issues as raised in ground (B) of the petition. This court cannot act as an appellate authority over the admission process.
19. In so far as the petitionerss case to challenge the admission process for the other M.A. courses is concerned, in our opinion, the petitioner certainly has no locus as this Prashant Rane 15/17 2 wp [email protected](IANo.49612020).odt petition is not filed as public interest petition. We are also not satisfied of the bonafides of the petitioner to pursue this petition, and more particularly asserting such overbearing prayers. This more particularly when the petition itself is patently defective, inasmuch as those candidates who would be adversely afected by the prayers as made, are not parties to the petition. The petition ought to fail on this count alone.
20. In any event, it is really adventurous for the petitioner to comprehend that on the basis of such specious pleas, the entire selection procedure for all the M.A. courses could be set aside. The petitioner appears to be totally ill- advised to prosecute such pleas.
21. In so far as the petitionerss contentions on the UGC Regulations is concerned, we are not persuaded to accept any such plea. There is no material on record which would show that the UGC did not permit such restructuring or modification of the admission procedure, which was necessary on account of the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic. UGC is represented by its learned Counsel Mr.Rodrigues, who would have only one contention, namely that the only deficiency, in Prashant Rane 16/17 2 wp [email protected](IANo.49612020).odt the admission process undertaken by the TISS was of non- publication of the merit list. The merit list was later on published and made available, as noted by us above. The petitioner also does not have any grievance in that regard.
22. In the above circumstances, we have no hesitation to come to a conclusion that the prayers as made by the petitioner are wholly untenable. We accordingly dismiss the petition. We, however, refrain from imposing cost.
23. Interim application would also not survive. It is accordingly disposed of.
24. This order will be digitally signed by the Personal Assistant of this Court. All concerned will act on production by fax or e-mail of a digitally signed copy of this order.
G.S.KULKARNI, J. CHIEF JUSTICE Digitally signed by Prashant V. Prashant Rane V. Rane Date: 2020.10.29 16:50:53 +0530 Prashant Rane 17/17