JUDGMENT & ORDER : By means of this writ petition the petitioner has challenged the appointment of the respondent No.2 in the post of Associate Professor in the Department of Business Management under Tripura University [Post Code : B25-UR] in terms of the decision taken in the 25th Meeting of the Executive Council held on 14.05.2016 in the Council Hall, Administrative Building, Tripura University, minutes of which has been circulated under No. F.TU/REG/EC/25/2016 dated 16.05.2016 (Annexure-P/7 to the writ petition) on the solitary ground that the MBA Degree of the respondent No.2 cannot be treated as a valid degree. 2. The facts which are not in dispute are that Tripura University, the respondent No.1, by the Advertisement NoF.TU/02/2013 dated 20.03.2013 (Annexure-P/1 to the writ petition) had invited application for selection of various posts including 2(two) posts of Associate Professor in the Business Management [B25-UR and B26-SC], for which the following qualifications were declared essential: “Code B-25-26: (i) Consistently good academic record with at least 55% marks (or an equivalent grade in a point scale wherever grading system is followed) in Master’s Degree in Business Management/Administration/in a management related discipline or first class in two years full time PGDM declared equivalent by AIU/recognized by the AICTE/UGC; Or, First Class graduate and professionally qualified Chartered Accountant/Cost and Works Accountant/Company Secretary of the concerned Statutory Body. (ii) Ph.D. or Fellow of Indian Institute of Management or of an Institute recognized by AICTE and declared equivalent by the AIU; (iii) A minimum of eight years’ experience of teaching/industry/research/professional at managerial level excluding the period spent for obtaining the research degree; Or, (iv) In the event the candidate is from industry and the profession, the following requirements shall constitute as essential requirements: (1) Consistently good academic record with at least 55% marks (or an equivalent grade in a point scale wherever grading system is followed) in Master’s Degree in Business Management/Administration/in a relevant management related discipline or First Class in two years full time PGDM declared equivalent by AIU/recognized by the AICTE/UGC. Or, First Class graduate and professionally qualified Chartered Accountant/Cost and Works Accountant/Company Secretary of the concerned Statutory Body. (2) A minimum of ten years’ experience of teaching/industry/research/profession, out of which five years must be at the level of Assistant Professor or equivalent excluding the period spent for obtaining the research degree. Or, First Class graduate and professionally qualified Chartered Accountant/Cost and Works Accountant/Company Secretary of the concerned Statutory Body. (2) A minimum of ten years’ experience of teaching/industry/research/profession, out of which five years must be at the level of Assistant Professor or equivalent excluding the period spent for obtaining the research degree. The candidate should have professional work experience, which is significant and can be recognized at National/International level as equivalent to Ph.D. and ten years’ managerial experience in industry/profession of which at least five years should be at the level comparable to that of Lecturer/Assistant Professor. (v) Without prejudice to the above, the following conditions may be considered desirable: (i) Teaching, research, industrial and/or professional experience in a reputed organization; (ii) Published work, such as research papers, patents filed/obtained, books and/or technical reports; (iii) Experience of guiding the project work/dissertation of PG/Research Students or supervising R&D projects in industry.” 3. In response to the said Advertisement dated 20.03.2013, both the petitioner and the respondent No.2 had applied for the said post of Associate Professor [B25-UR]. The petitioner was also asked to appear for the interview and, accordingly, he appeared for the interview on 24.03.2015 in the Administrative Building of Tripura University. The respondent No.2 has submitted a degree certificate in Master of Business Management from Visva-Bharati, the respondent No.3, which he secured in the year 2000. 4. The petitioner had collected some information by way of disclosure under the Right to Information Act, 2005, ‘RTI Act’ for short, on 08.01.2016, wherefrom the petitioner came to know that Visva-Bharati does not offer Master of Business Management Degree on its own and as per records Visva-Bharati did not approve Master of Business Management course to any of its former associate Institutes. Thereafter, the petitioner received further information and there was no distinguishable difference of the said information with that was earlier received by him. For the said disclosure, it became clear to the petitioner that the respondent No.2 did not have the eligibility for making application under the said advertisement for the post of Associate Professor of Business Management (B25). 5. The Executive Council of the respondent No.1 on 14.05.2016 decided to issue the offer of appointment to the respondent No.2 for the post of Associate Professor in Business Management in terms of the recommendation made by the Selection Committee concerned. 5. The Executive Council of the respondent No.1 on 14.05.2016 decided to issue the offer of appointment to the respondent No.2 for the post of Associate Professor in Business Management in terms of the recommendation made by the Selection Committee concerned. From the agenda minutes under No. 21/25/2016 dated 16.05.2016, it transpires that the respondent No. 1 received a letter from the Joint Registrar (Examinations), Visva-Bharati, Birbhum, West Bengal regarding verification of MBA Degree Certificate of the respondent No.2 who appeared for the interview held on 24.03.2015 for the post of Associate Professor in Business Management of Tripura University. The said letter was the basis of the decision of the Executive Council. 6. The petitioner has also mentioned that from the Minutes under No. F.TU/REG/EC/23/2015 dated 03.08.2015 (Annexure-P/7A to the writ petition) of the proceedings of the 23rd Meeting of the Executive Council held on 30-31/07/2015 in the Council Hall, Tripura University, the petitioner came to know that the Executive Council had taken a decision to verify the degree of the selected candidate for the post of Associate Professor in Business Management. They had persuaded the matter for having the verification from Visva-Bharati, which issued that certificate. 7. In that backdrop, the petitioner has asserted that the respondent No.2 does not have the requisite qualification for appointment to the post of Associate Professor in Business Management inasmuch as his degree in MBA cannot be accepted as the respondent No.3 did not confer such degree and they did not even affiliate any institute for conferring such degree on their behalf. The petitioner has submitted further that the claim of the respondent No.2 that he obtained the MBA degree from the respondent No.3, cannot be treated as correct and such claim shall be discarded without further consideration. Thus, he has challenged in substance the decision of the Executive Council in respect of issuance of offer of appointment in favour of the respondent No.2. 8. The respondent No.2 has categorically stated that he has obtained Master of Business Management (MBA) from an institute recognized by the Visva-Bharati under a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU). Thus, he has challenged in substance the decision of the Executive Council in respect of issuance of offer of appointment in favour of the respondent No.2. 8. The respondent No.2 has categorically stated that he has obtained Master of Business Management (MBA) from an institute recognized by the Visva-Bharati under a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU). By filing the reply on 06.02.2017, the respondent No.2 has categorically stated that in view of the query made by the respondent No.1, he had requested the Registrar, Visva-Bharati by a letter dated 21.12.2015 to furnish the particulars relating to his MBA degree and, accordingly the information was furnished to the respondent No.1 by the Visva-Bharati vide letter dated 29.12.2015 with a copy to him. A copy of the said letter has been made available with his reply as Annexure-R/2. For purpose of reference, the entire text of the said letter dated 29.12.2015 is extracted hereunder: “VII/Exam/VI/306 Date 29.12.2015 To whom it may concern This is to certify that Sri Debarshi Mukhopadhyay has completed Master of Business Administration (MBA), two years study programme (Session 1998-2000) under Institute of Modern Management, Kolkata, one of the former Associate Institute of Visva-Bharati. His Roll No. was 68. Sd/- Illegible Joint Registrar (Examination) Visva-Bharati” 9. The respondent No.1 by filing their reply has submitted that they had received the said letter dated 29.12.2015 and, on the basis of that the Executive Council took its decision to appoint the respondent No.2 in the post of Associate Professor, Business Management on 14.05.2016. In this regard they have asserted in para 23 of their reply as under: “In response to the said letter of the Registrar (R-1/4) the Joint Registrar (Examination) of the respondent No.3 informed the Registrar of the respondent No.1 by his letter dated 29.12.2015 by enclosing a certificate of the same date that the respondent No.2 has completed Master of Business Administration (MBA) 2(two) years study programme (Session 1998-2000) under Institute of Modern Management, Kolkata one of the former Associate Institute of Visva Bharati and his Roll No. was 68.” As such, their decision does not suffer from any infirmity as alleged by the petitioner. 10. 10. The respondent No.2 filed a copy of the certificate issued by the Registrar, Visva-Bharati, the respondent No.3, dated 13.02.2002, declaring that the respondent No.2 was admitted to the Degree of Master of Business Administration and he had successfully completed 2(two) years study programme (1998-2000) at the Institute of Modern Management, Kolkata and he got First Class. The veracity of the said certificate is not challenged by the petitioner. The challenge is limited to whether the degree can be treated as valid or not. 11. The respondent No.3 has appeared having received the notice from this court, filed their reply and categorically denied that the officials of Visva-Bharati made any communication to the petitioner stating in clear term that Visva-Bharati did not confer any certificate of MBA of its own or that it did not recognize any other institute to confer any degree in MBA or that the claim of the petitioner that the respondent No.2 did not obtain his MBA degree from Visva-Bharati. The respondent No.3 has further stated in their reply that the reply received under the RTI Act is the result of pushing a wrong question forward and, as such the reply that has been received was also not very correct in the circumstances of the case. They have categorically stated as under: “But it is denied that Visva-Bharati or the CPIO of Bisva Bharati or Joint Registrar (Examination) of Bisva Bharati has made any communication to the writ petitioner stating that MBA Degree of the Respondent No.2 is not accepted/admitted to have been conferred by the Visva-Bharati.” 12. On the basis of such disclosure made in the reply, the petitioner filed the rejoinder against the reply filed by the respondent No.1 on 22.09.2016 and, submitted some documents with the said reply, which according to this court is not very material at all. According to the petitioner, in terms of the Visva-Bharati Act and Statutes, the convocation is held for conferring the degrees or for other purposes in such a manner as prescribed by the ordinances. 13. Finally, from the side of the petitioner, Mr. S.K. Deb, learned senior counsel has submitted that a degree cannot be signed by the Registrar, it can only be signed by the Vice-Chancellor. Mr. 13. Finally, from the side of the petitioner, Mr. S.K. Deb, learned senior counsel has submitted that a degree cannot be signed by the Registrar, it can only be signed by the Vice-Chancellor. Mr. Deb, learned senior counsel has referred to Section 22 of Chapter IV of the University Grants Commission Act, 1956, ‘UGC Act’ for short, where the following has been provided: “22. (1) The right of conferring or granting degrees shall be exercised only by a University established or incorporated by or under a Central Act, a Provincial Act or a State Act or an institution deemed to be a University under section 3 or an institution specially empowered by an Act of Parliament to confer or grant degrees. (2) Save as provided in sub-section (1), no person or authority shall confer, or grant, or hold himself or itself out as entitled to confer or grant, any degree. (3) For the purposes of this section, “degree’ means any such degree as may, with the previous approval of the Central Government, be specified in this behalf by the Commission by notification in the official Gazette.” The said provision does not help the petitioner’s case in any manner. 14. Thereafter, Mr. Deb, learned senior counsel has handed up the information disclosed in terms of Section 7(1) of the RTI Act, 2005 by the Joint Registrar (Examinations), Visva-Bharati udner Memo under No.Exam./RTI/2016-17 dated 27.01.2017, where it has been categorically stated that the Master Degree Certificate of the University is issued by the Vice-Chancellor, Visva-Bharati. Any Master Degree Course of the University is regulated by the V.B. Act, Statutes and Ordinances. It has been further disclosed that the referred Master Degree Certificate was from a course approved by the Visva-Bharati and was regulated by the MOU signed between Visva-Bharati and that particular Institute. Mr. Deb, learned senior counsel has pressed very hard to state that, unless the certificate is signed by the Vice-Chancellor that cannot be treated as a valid certificate. He has reiterated that even the said degree is not conferred on respondent No.2 in the convocation. 15. Mr. S.M. Chakraborty, learned senior counsel appearing for the respondent No.1, Mr. A.K. Bhowmik, learned senior counsel appearing for the respondent No.2 and Mr. He has reiterated that even the said degree is not conferred on respondent No.2 in the convocation. 15. Mr. S.M. Chakraborty, learned senior counsel appearing for the respondent No.1, Mr. A.K. Bhowmik, learned senior counsel appearing for the respondent No.2 and Mr. D. Bhattacharji, learned counsel appearing for the respondent No.3, have in unison submitted that this writ petition is frivolous and the contention of the petitioner is not supported by any material. Since the respondent No.2 had prosecuted his course in the Institute of Modern Management, Kolkata, for his MBA programme, his roll number cannot be maintained in Visva-Bharati. When Visva-Bharati has stated that the Institute of Modern Management was their formerly associate institute, the petitioner by saying that it was not an affiliate institute cannot allowed to contend that the MBA Certificate which was issued by the Visva-Bharati for successfully passing the examination, cannot be accepted. The petitioner is none to contend that the certificate ought to have been issued by the Institute of Modern Management, not by the Visva-Bharati. Whether such certificate would be issued by convocation or not, it is a matter of ordinance. According to the ordinance, the degree would be conferred by convocation for the students of Visva-Bharati. Since the respondent No.2 had completed the programme in 2000 from the Institute of Modern Management, Kolkata and under the MOU since the degree has been conferred by the Visva-Bharati, Tripura University has done no wrong by accepting the said degree. The plea that, since the MBA Certificate has been signed by the Registrar of Visva-Bharati it cannot be accepted as the valid certificate is also not supported by any statute. Even the plea that the Master Degree Certificate can only be issued by a University not by an Institute, cannot be sustained in view of that the Master Degree Certificate has been issued by the Visva-Bharati, which is a recognized University by the University Grants Commission. 16. Having regard to the rival contentions raised by the learned counsel for the parties, this court is of the view that, since after verification Visva-Bharati, the respondent No.3, has confirmed that the Certificate was issued by them, this court is of the view that the challenge as to the validity of the MBA Degree of the respondent No.2 falls through. Having regard to the rival contentions raised by the learned counsel for the parties, this court is of the view that, since after verification Visva-Bharati, the respondent No.3, has confirmed that the Certificate was issued by them, this court is of the view that the challenge as to the validity of the MBA Degree of the respondent No.2 falls through. This court is not supposed to make a roving inquiry under the jurisdiction conferred by Article 226 of the Constitution of India. It is always the satisfaction of the appointing authority as to the genuinity of any Certificate unless such certificate is found manifestly illegal and despite that the said certificate has been accepted by the appointing authority arbitrarily. But, this is not a case where this court is shown to the hilt that the certificate that has been verified and accepted by the respondent No. 1 is a certificate which on the face of it, cannot be treated as a valid certificate issued by a University. 17. Having held so, this writ petition stands dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.