MANJUNATH VITTAL KAMATH Vs. INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner passed his B.Tech in Civil Engineering from IIT, Madras, in the year 1983. He claims to have got admission in various Universities abroad but could not go because of non-availability of student's visa. In the year 1998 he wrote entrance examination for Post Graduate course in Master of Business Management (MBA) at IIT Kharagpur, which he passed in the year 2000. Desirous of pursuing his studies further, the petitioner applied for admission for Ph.D programme in IIT Mumbai in December 1999. He received admission and was asked to join Ph.D. Programme with effect from January 2000 and was duly provided with the copy of the rules and regulations for Ph.D programme of the said Institute. According to the petitioner, he was unable to find suitable guide for his research project in finance. However, he suggested the name of Prof. Subroto Roy, Professor at IIT Kharapur, who could be appointed as external guide but the request of the petitioner was orally refused. On 11th March 2002 the petitioner received a letter from the Dy Registrar, Academic of the respondent University that the petitioner's case was put up for cancellation of his registration as he had not commenced his project in accordance with the regulations. Vide letter dated 17th March 2002, the petitioner informed the concerned authority that he was willing to accept any research committee nominated by the IIT Mumbai, however, in the meanwhile it recommended the cancellation. Vide letter dated 11th July 2002 the petitioner was informed of this fact. The petitioner had tried to meet the Dean (Academic) of the Institute, who declined to hear the petitioner in regard to the cancellation of registration. This matter was taken up by the Senate. In August 2002 the petitioner was informed that his registration would not be cancelled and one Prof. Korgaonkar was to be his guide and the petitioner was subsequently informed the thesis title "Recursive Prediction of time series through Dynamic reconstruction using radial Basis function Neural Networks". Prof. Pushpakan Bhattacharya was appointed as the co-guide. Resultantly, on 28th August 2002,, the petitioner complied with the formalities for regular registration for Ph.D.

(2.) '' It is further averred in the petition by the petitioner that he was not given access to the computer facilities. Subsequently the petitioner wanted to change the topic which was also permitted and he was permitted to take the topic" Option Pricing: a modified Black-Scholes solution using Hurst Parameter". The petitioner was satisfied with his guides as well as with the facilities available and wrote letters to the Systems Administrator and head of the department and vide his letter dated 31st January 2004 prayed for extension of time as well as change of guide. He was called upon to present paper on 2nd April, 2004 at Research Conference at Goa, which he was not able to complete due to difficulties in computer lab. The petitioner was not registered for current semester in July 2004 and hostel accommodation was also declined and vide letter dated 23rd August 2004, he asked for formal letter that he had been removed from Ph.D. Programme. A letter was supplied to him on 8th September 2004. Finally vide letter dated 28th September 2004, the petitioner was informed by the Asst. Registrar of the IIT Mumbai that Ph.D registration of the petitioner had been cancelled.

(3.) '' According to the petitioner, the above orders are not sustainable in law, primarily for the reasons that in terms of rules 8.4 and 8.5 of the Rules and Regulations of the Indian Institute of Technology, Mumbai there is no time prescribed for Ph.D programme, and no jurisdiction is vested in the Senate to cancel the registration of a candidate for Ph.D programme. The action is otherwise arbitrary, without any basis and is violative of the principles of natural justice.