ARCHANA GOGOI Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. K.U. Ahmed, learned counsel for the petitioner in all the writ petitions. Mr. K. Gogoi, learned standing counsel, appears for the Department of Higher Education in all the writ petitions. Dr. A. Chamuah, learned standing counsel, appears for the UGC in WP(C) No. 4721/2021 and WP(C) No. 6543/2021, and Dr. P. Agarwal, learned standing counsel, appears for the UGC in WP (C) No. 556/2024. Mr. S.K. Das, learned counsel, appears for respondent no.4 in WP (C) No. 4721/2021, and Mr. P. Hazarika, learned counsel, appears for respondent nos.3 And 4 in WP(C) No. 556/2024.

(2.) These writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India have been preferred by the petitioners being aggrieved by the the condition incorporated in the orders granting them each regularisation in services insofar as the orders require the petitioner s to qualify in the NET/SLET/Ph.D. within 2 years, failing which their services were to be discontinued and till which time, they would be entitled to get a fixed pay only. Although the petitioners have challenged the respective orders passed concerning each of the petitioners, all the orders are dtd. 24/5/2018, and are worded identically, save and except for a difference in the description of the petitioners and the posts in which they were regularised.

(3.) It is the common stand of the petitioners that they had acquired the PhD degree before the orders of regularisation being passed, while the uniform stand of the respondents in all the petitions is that the doctorate degrees were obtained in violation of the relevant University Grants Commission Regulations, and therefore cannot be recognized as valid PhD degrees.