SARITA CHAUHAN Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner who was working as a Lecturer with the respondent-Engineering College sought permission from the College to pursue the M.Tech. (Weekend programme) conducted by Mewar University, Chittorgarh. The said course was a course based on a weekend programme for a period of two years to be conducted in four semesters. The permission for pursuing the said weekend programme was granted by the College and in the year 2012, the petitioner completed the said course. After the completion of the course, degree was granted to her for the Course and the petitioner moved a representation to the College for inclusion of her said M.Tech. degree in her service book. As there was a discrepancy regarding the period of the course and as to whether a weekend programme would be a recognized course by the University, a clarification was sought by the Registrar of the MLV University from the Registrar of the Mewar University. To the said communication dtd. 26/2/2013 of the Registrar, a response vide letter dtd. 28/2/2013 was given by the Registrar of the Mewar University, wherein it was clarified that the M.Tech. Course pursued by the petitioner was a regular degree course but it was designed in a manner that the classes were held on weekends so that the working persons could also apply. It was further clarified that the petitioner had attended more than 80% of the classes which was scheduled on the weekends. Further, it was certified that the course was completed in five months and the average of total credit hours was 250 hours per semester. Not satisfied with the said clarification, a clarification was sought by the University from the UGC also regarding the M.Tech. degree of the petitioner. The response vide letter dtd. 1/8/2013 was sent by the UGC and it was clarified that the M.Tech. degree is valid if the course had been conducted in regular mode at the main campus of the University and as per the norms and standards prescribed by AICTE.

(2.) Further, a Screening Committee was constituted by the University for the purpose of verification and decision as to the degree of the petitioner. The said Screening Committee comprised of the Principal of Government Engineering College, Ajmer; the Professor and Head of the Technical University of Kota and one Associate Professor of the respondent-University. After considering all the information received from the Mewar University, Chittorgarh and the UGC, the Screening Committee reached to a specific conclusion that the petitioner had fulfilled the requirements for M.Tech. degree. After the report of the Screening Committee, the University proceeded on to grant the benefits of the said degree to the petitioner. But when the matter was put up before the Board of Governors ('BOG') in its meeting held on 17/7/2015, the BOG refused to accept the degree of M.Tech. of the petitioner and therefore, the benefits granted to the petitioner were ordered to be withdrawn by the University. Even, order for recovery of the benefits already granted to her was also passed on 11/3/2015. Aggrieved against the order of BOG and the further consequential orders, the present writ petition has been preferred.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner pursued the course of M.Tech. after due permission from her employer University and after pursuing all the required formalities for completion of the same. Counsel argued that the degree as granted by the Mewar University, Chittorgarh is nowhere under challenge and neither there is any dispute regarding the recognition of the course. The course and the degree have been recognized by the UGC and the same has even been clarified by UGC in the present matter. Counsel further argued that even the Screening Committee which comprised of two of the members who had no connection with the employer University, reached to a specific conclusion that the degree obtained by the petitioner was a valid one. The decision of the BOG in not accepting the degree of the petitioner was without any reason and logic. There was no reason available with the BOG to disagree with the conclusion of the Screening Committee.