Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

1. By this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner has sought the relief of Certiorari for quashing the order of the Director, Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur, dated 11th Oct. 1979 (Annexure '5') requiring the petitioner to submit his thesis in English instead of in Hindi, and further for a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondent to admit the petitioner's thesis submitted in Hindi and to award him the Ph. D Degree.

2. In the month of July 1971, the petitioner, after obtaining M. Sc. Degree in Chemistry, joined Ph. D programme in Chemistry, in the Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur. The petitioner, thereafter, applied for admission in Ph. D. programme in Humanities Social Sciences." He was admitted in the Semester beginning from Dec. 1971. At the end of each semester, he appeared for the examination and could pass the same to continue the programme by the end of the 4th semester. Throughout, his medium of instruction was English. The question papers were also set in English, and the petitioner answered them in English. Thereafter, in accordance with the procedure of the Institute, the petitioner appeared for the comprehensive examination, which was also held in English. He answered the questions in English and did not raise any objection for being permitted to answer them to Hindi. After qualifying himself in the comprehensive examination, the petitioner, according to the prescribed procedure, had to prepare a thesis in consultation with the Department of post Graduate Committee (hereinafter referred to as D. P. G. C.). Dr. (Mrs.) Mul-lick was appoited as his guide/supervisor.

"Convener D. P. G. C- has recommended that an extension be granted since the thesis is indeed nearing completion but in Hindi. The status of such thesis is still unclear to me.

Sd/- Mrs. Mullick."

5. It was for the first time that the guide of the petitioner notified that the petitioner was writing his thesis in Hindi. The application for extension was although recommended by D. P. G. C. to the Senate Post Graduate Committee (hereinafter referred to as the S. P. G. C), but the petitioner was intimated that the medium of Ph. D. thesis was English, which was in consonance with the decision of S. P. G. C. taken in the meeting held on Dec. 4 and 5, 1978. The S. P. G. C. in its meeting held on Aug. 22, 1979, extended the term by one more semester. This decision was communicated to the petitioner by the Convener of the D. P. G. C. by the letter dated 1-9-1979 This decision clearly stated that the petitioner had been given the last extension on the understanding that he would submit the thesis in English during this period. He was warned that if this was not done, the petitioner would be deemed to have withdrawn from the Institute.

6. The controversy about submitting the thesis in Hindi came before the Education Policy Committee on the reference made by the Chairman, S. P. G. C. The Education Policy Com-

mittee, after discussing at its meeting held on 16th Mar. 1979, recommended that the thesis be submitted in Hindi provided it was accompanied by an English translation authenticated by the Thesis Supervisor. In view of the decision of the S. P. G. C., the petitioner's guide withdrew herself and expressed her inability to continue as such unless the petitioner changed the medium of writing to English. For the first on 24th Sept. 1979, the petitioner wrote a letter to the Director seeking his intervention to be allowed to submit his thesis in Hindi. This letter was replied by the Director on Oct. 11, 1979, copy of which has been filed as Annexure '5' to the writ petition. The petitioner was informed that the S. P. G. C.'s decision of requiring the petitioner to submit the thesis in English was based on the following considerations:--

13. Nothing could be shown to us that the Ordinance IX, referred to above, is ultra vires the Constitution. The Ordinance had been framed by the Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur, in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 38(c) of the Act. The said Institute had laid down English as the medium of instruction which was adopted by the Kanpur Institute of Technology. Till that Ordinance was amended, it is not possible to hold that the petitioner had a right to submit his thesis in Hindi. When the petitioner joined the Institute, he knew that English was the medium of instruction. His claim for entitlement to submit his thesis in Hindi is not borne out from any of the provisions of the Constitution. Whether or not the petitioner ought to have been permitted to submit his thesis in Hindi, when the same had been accepted as the national language, is a political question. For not permitting the petitioner to submit his thesis in Hindi a number of difficulties have been set forth in the counter-affidavit. One may or may not agree with the pleas taken in the counter-affidavit, but the same is beyond the power of judicial review, and the Court is therefore, not in a position to give any direction in that regard. Maybe, that the difficulties pointed out were not insurmountable.