Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 1 (ALL)

Sarika Tyagi (Dr. ) v. State of U. P.

2015-01-01

PANKAJ MITHAL, V.K.SHUKLA

body2015
JUDGMENT Hon'ble Pankaj Mithal,J Heard Dr. Sarika Tyagi, petitioner, (in person), Sri Ramesh Upadhyay, Chief Standing Counsel appearing alongwith Sri A. K Rai, Additional Chief Standing Counsel for State-respondents as well as Sri Shiv Nath Singh, Advocate assisted by Sri Satyam Singh, Advocate appearing for U.P. Higher Education Service Commission, respondent no. 2. 2. Dr. Sarika Tyagi, petitioner is before this Court with a request to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to allow the petitioner to appear in the examination to be conducted on 04.01.2015 for the post of Assistant Professor in the Law Faculty in the department of respondent by U.P. Higher Education Service Commission, respondent no. 2. 3. On the matter being taken up today, it has been asserted on behalf petitioner, Dr. Sarika Tyagi that she fulfils minimum eligibility criteria that has been provided for in the advertisement in question, in view of this there is no occasion or justification on the part of the respondents not to permit the petitioner to undertake examination in question and accordingly this Court should come to her rescue and reprieve. 4. Request that has been made by petitioner has been resisted by the State as well as by the counsel appearing for U.P. Higher Education Service Commission on the premises that petitioner does not fulfil minimum eligibility criteria that has been provided for, as at Master's degree Level she does not have to her credit 55% marks, in view of this her candidature has not been entertained and she has been informed accordingly and any interference by this Court, would tantamount to diluting the eligibility criteria prescribed. 5. We have perused the pleadings as have come on record in the light of arguments advanced, and we find that UGC has provided guideline for qualification of Assistant Professor which is being extracted below: - 4.4.1 Arts, Humanities, Sciences, Social Sciences, Commerce, Education, Languages, Law, Journalism and Mass Communication. " i. Good academic record as defined by the concerned university with at least 55% marks (or an equivalent grade in a point scale wherever grading system is followed) at the Master's Degree level in a relevant subject from an Indian University, or an equivalent degree from an accredited foreign university. ii. " i. Good academic record as defined by the concerned university with at least 55% marks (or an equivalent grade in a point scale wherever grading system is followed) at the Master's Degree level in a relevant subject from an Indian University, or an equivalent degree from an accredited foreign university. ii. Besides fulfilling the above qualifications, the candidate must have cleared the National Eligibility Test (NET) conducted by the UGC, CSIR or similar test accredited by the UGC like SLET/SET. iii. Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-clauses (i) and (ii) to this Clause 4.4.1, candidates, who are, or Ph. D. Degree in accordance with the University Grants Commission (Minimum Standards and Procedure for Award of Ph. D Degree) Regulations, 2009, shall be exempted from the requirement of the minimum eligibility condition of NET/SLET/SET for recruitment and appointment of Assistant Professor or equivalent positions in Universities/Colleges/Institutions. iv. NET/SLET/SET shall also not be required for such Master Programs in disciplines for which NET/SLET/SET is not conducted." Bare perusal of the educational qualification and eligibility criteria that has been prescribed clearly proceeds to mention that a candidate who intends for being appointed as Assistant Professor has to have to his/her credit good academic record as defined by concerned University with at least 55% marks or equivalent grade in a point scale whenever grading system is followed at the Master's Degree Level in a relevant subject from an Indian University or an equivalent degree from an accredited foreign University. Apart from the said qualification, the incumbent is also required to clear the National Eligibility Test (NET) conducted by UGC, CSIR or similar test accredited by the UGC like SLET/SET. Exemption has been provided from the requirement of minimum eligibility condition of NET/SLET/SET for requirement and appointment of Assistant Professor qua the candidates, who have been awarded Ph.D Degree in accordance with the University Grants Commission (Minimum Standards and Procedure for award of Ph.D Degree) Regulations 2009. NET/SLET/SET is also not required for such Master Programs in disciplines for which NET/SLET/SET is not conduced. Under the scheme of things provided for, there is no exemption/relaxation provided for in reference of qualification provided for i.e. of having to his/her credit academic record as defined by the University concerned with at least 55% marks at the Master Degree level in a relevant subject. 6. Under the scheme of things provided for, there is no exemption/relaxation provided for in reference of qualification provided for i.e. of having to his/her credit academic record as defined by the University concerned with at least 55% marks at the Master Degree level in a relevant subject. 6. In the present case this fact has been accepted that at Master's Degree Level petitioner does not have to her credit 55% marks and this fact is also fortified from the details that has been set out by her in her application form wherein in LLM examination she has to her credit 54.88% marks. In the present case principle of rounding up cannot be applied as applicability of principle of rounding up will lead to diluting the standard prescribed by the UGC wherein at least 55% marks at the Master's Degree Level in relevant subject is a mandatory requirement, as word "at least" denotes and indicates the minimum/lower limit and under the scheme of things said essential qualification is not at all relexble. Once such is the factual situation that petitioner does not fulfil requisite eligibility criteria as has been provided for by the University Grants Commission then she has rightly been treated ineligible. 7. In view of this, writ petition sans merit and is accordingly, dismissed.