DUSHYANT KUMAR Vs. JAI NARAIN VYAS UNIVERSITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE grievance of the petitioner is that admission to Ph.D. Course in Law was made by the respondent- Jai Narain Vyas University (Faculty of Law) on the basis of marks obtained in post graduation course (LL.M.) as against merit of M. Phil. & Ph.D. Entrance Test, (MPET, for short) notified by the respondent- University vide Annex.5 (The date of notifying the said Rules is not on the record). However, the learned counsel for the petitioner stated that these Rules were framed in pursuance of the Notification dated 01.06.2009 (Annex.4) (Page 21 of the paper book) notified by UGC; and Rule 9 thereof states that such merit has to be prepared on the basis of MPET test merit only.

(2.) ACCORDING to the petitioner, he obtained 93 marks out of 100 in the said MPET Test and 55.75% in LL.M. whereas the respondent University while preparing the merit list vide Annex.8 dated 16.01.2013 has admitted Ms. Janak Kanwar, at serial No.20 with the marks of 55.69% in LL.M. and thus, a person even though less meritorious than the petitioner, was admitted in the Ph.D. Course ignoring the candidature of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner also urged that said Rule 5, on the basis of which the marks of LL.M., were adopted as per the criteria as per Rule 5 of Annex.5 of M. Phil & Ph.D. Entrance Test Rules, which is in conflict with Rule 9, notified by the University Grants Commission. Both the rules are quoted herein below for ready reference: By UGC:-

(3.) ACCORDINGLY , this writ petition is disposed of and the petitioner is relegated back to avail the alternative remedy. He may approach the respondent No.1, Registrar of J.N.V. University with his representation along-with relevant evidence within one week from today and the Registrar may place the same before the Vice- Chancellor of the J.N.V. University or any other competent authority of the University to take a decision in the matter and pass speaking order; and if the petitioner is desirous of a personal hearing in this regard, he may be also provided the same. The respondent- University has to take a stand in the matter and it is only thereafter that if the stand of the University is found to be violative with the relevant Rules notified by the UGC and if the petitioner's grievance still remains, he would be free to approach this Court by way of fresh writ petition. It is expected from the respondent University that it will decide the matter expeditiously, preferably within a period of one month from today. A copy of this order be sent to the respondents forthwith. No costs.