PRAMOD CHANDRA PAL Vs. UNIVERSITY OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is a Post Graduate in Second Divison in Zoology having qualified from the University of Saugar. He applied for registrtation for Ph. D. in Zoology under the supervision of Dr. N. K. Lohya, Associate Professor of Zoology in the University of Rajasthan. Dr. Lohya has further certified that the subject choosen for research work had not been studied so far and has sufficient scope for keeping the candidate engaged for two years. His subject was approved by Dr. Lohya as is clear vide Annexure-2 attached to the writ petition.

(2.) IN addition to being Post-Graduate, the petitioner is said to have worked on various research projects in All INdia INstitute of Medical Sciences (A. I. I. M. S.), New Dehli. He had attended some INternational conferences on `reproductive Phy- siology'. He is a member of Scientific Society etc. etc.

(3.) THE University of Rajasthan has filed the written statement. THE facts as stated are admitted, but the petition is being opposed on the ground that the peti- tioner cannot be allowed to do research work in view of Ordinance 124 of the Ordinance. It is stated that the Ordinance 124 was amended in the year 1985 and the proviso clause was deleted. It is further admitted in the written statement that the petitioner was permitted to carry on the research work only provisionally. It is submitted that the then Vice Chancellor had perhaps committed a mistake by allo- wing the petitioner to carry on the research work provisionally. THE letter which was communicated to the petitioner had omitted certain provisions which are now reproduced in Annexure R/1 to the writ petition. It is submitted that the recommendations of the Standing Committee were to be again referred to the Research Board. Such Board is said to have met on 24. 7. 1997 and the recommendations of the Sta- nding Committee were not confirmed in the meeting held on 23. 7. 1997, 24. 7. 1997 and 1. 8. 1997 and, therefore, in view of the amended Ordinance 124, wherein such proviso had been omitted, according to the University, no right had vested in the petitioner to apply for or appear for registration for the Ph. D. degree.