Research › Search › Judgment

Kerala High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 946 (KER)

Mini Paul v. Mahatma Gandhi University

2017-06-27

SHAJI P.CHALY

body2017
JUDGMENT Shaji P. Chaly, J. 1. This writ petition is filed by the petitioner, who is a Research Scholar, seeking to declare that petitioner is entitled to complete the part-time research in law as per the existing norms of 2011 without insisting for completing the "course work" in two spells during April, May and June of two years after the registration, as the petitioner has already undergone the requisite number of course work classes conducted at the research centre, and for other related and consequential reliefs. 2. Petitioner is working as Assistant Professor of Law at Government Law College, Ernakulam. She joined as Lecturer in Law in the 3rd respondent college on 4.7.2000. She was promoted as Lecturer (Senior Scale) in 2006, which was re- designated as Assistant Professor in 2010. Petitioner applied for Ph.D registration with the Mahatma Gandhi University in June, 2011, evident from Ext.P1. Accordingly, petitioner was interviewed by the Doctoral Committee of the University Department on 28.10.2011 and she was duly selected and recommended for her Ph.D admission. Pursuant to the above, 1st respondent sanctioned her provisional registration on 19.6.2012 as per Ext.P2 and sanctioned her provisional registration for Research in Law at its approved research center in the 3rd respondent college. The Department of Higher Education, Thiruvananthapuram as per Ext.P3 dated 28.1.2012 permitted the petitioner to do part-time research for Ph.D under the 1st respondent without any hindrance to her official duties and smooth functioning of the college. The University Grants Commission as per Regulation, 2009 stipulates minimum standards and procedure for award of M.Phil/Ph.D Degree. As per the norms, each candidate after having been admitted for Ph-D is required to undertake a course work for a minimum period of one semester, evident from Ext.P4. 3. While matters being so, 1st respondent issued revised regulation for Ph.D registration and Award of Degree of Doctor of Philosophy 2010, evident from Ext.P5. First respondent issued Ext.P6 notification dated 29.6.2011 inviting application for registration of research scholars based on Ext.P5. The regulations of 2010 mandated that all candidates admitted to Ph.D. Programmme should initially be registered as a full-time scholar and should undergo course work at the University Department for a continuous period of six months. Regular and permanent teachers, however, could on their specific request do their course work in the 3rd or 4th semesters. The regulations of 2010 mandated that all candidates admitted to Ph.D. Programmme should initially be registered as a full-time scholar and should undergo course work at the University Department for a continuous period of six months. Regular and permanent teachers, however, could on their specific request do their course work in the 3rd or 4th semesters. It is also stipulated, if they fail to join the department at the beginning of the 2nd year, their provisional registration would automatically lapse. This provision hampered the teaching community's prospects of advanced research, as most of the teachers were not in a position to take continuous leave for a period of six months. 4. First respondent university then passed a revised regulation for Ph.D registration and Award of the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy dated 22.5.2012, which according to the petitioner, permits part-time registration for regular and permanent teachers on receipt of provisional registration orders from the University, evident from Ext.P7 dated 22.5.2012. As per clause 9 of Ext.P7, all candidates admitted to the Ph.D programme of the University shall be considered as full-time research scholars except regular and permanent teachers from the Government and aided colleges, who shall be permitted to do the course work in accordance with the convenience of the research center. So also it is stated, clause 10 permits each student other than regular and permanent teachers from the Government and aided colleges affiliated to 1st respondent University to undergo course work for a period of one semester within a continuous period of two semesters. 5. According to the petitioner, petitioner applied for registration pursuant to Ext.P6 notification dated 29.6.2011 issued by the 1st respondent and petitioner was given provisional registration, which permits regular and permanent teachers to do course work as per the convenience of the research center. The course work classes at the research center commenced on 18.6.2012. Petitioner joined the research center as part-time research scholar on 22.6.2012. According to the petitioner, petitioner has attended the research center on all working days (Saturdays and vacation period) other than academic days since the date of her joining. Her half yearly progress report from 22.6.2012 to 21.12.2012 and from 22.12.2012 to 30.6.2013 are produced as Exts.P8 and P9. Petitioner joined the research center as part-time research scholar on 22.6.2012. According to the petitioner, petitioner has attended the research center on all working days (Saturdays and vacation period) other than academic days since the date of her joining. Her half yearly progress report from 22.6.2012 to 21.12.2012 and from 22.12.2012 to 30.6.2013 are produced as Exts.P8 and P9. It is the contention of the petitioner that, petitioner has already completed the required days of appearance in the course work classes and Ext.P10 certificate is issued by the 3rd respondent, the Head of the Research Center. It is the case of the petitioner that, she has attended all the course work lecture and assignment presentation classes at the research center. Petitioner has also participated in two weeks workshop on Research Methodology as part of the course work and has also published one article and presented three papers pertaining to her topic of research at three national seminars. However, when the petitioner approached the 1st respondent for remitting the fee and submitting half yearly progress report, she was informed that, she should once again undergo the course work at a continuous stretch of one semester within a period of four semesters based on the order dated 12.6.2013 viz., Ext.P11. According to the petitioner, 1st respondent was also relying on Ext.P12 order dated 19.6.2013. Therefore, it is the contention of the petitioner that, as per Ext.P12, the original clause 9 in Ext.P7 has been deleted, whereby the privilege given to regular and permanent teachers of the Government and aided colleges affiliated to the Mahatma Gandhi University has been deleted. However, according to the petitioner, on a combined reading of Exts.P11 and P12, 1st respondent is insisting that, petitioner should undergo the course work within two spells of three months each to be conducted from April to June every year and contends that, Exts.P11 and P12 apply only prospectively. Therefore, the same will not bind the petitioner. Other contentions are also raised by the petitioner seeking various reliefs including permission to write the examination during the pendency of the writ petition and additional documents are also produced, which may not be of much relevance to consider the basic issues involved in the writ petition. 6. A counter affidavit is filed by respondents 1 and 2 controverting the allegations, claims and demands raised by the petitioner in the writ petition. 6. A counter affidavit is filed by respondents 1 and 2 controverting the allegations, claims and demands raised by the petitioner in the writ petition. That apart it is stated that, petitioner was granted provisional registration for Ph.D Programme in Law on part-time basis at the 3rd respondent college under the guidance of Dr.V.R. Jayadevan as per Ext.R1(a). The Mahatma Gandhi University has introduced course work for all the Ph.D programmes conducted by it from July, 2010 admission onwards in tune with the UGC Regulations, 2009 and the petitioner took admission during the year 2011. As per rule 9 of the revised regulation for Ph.D. registration and Award of the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy, all the candidates who have got registration for Ph.D. Programme shall join their research center immediately and undergo the "course work" in their subjects in the broad area of research and spend a minimum period of one semester in the research center under the supervision of the Head of the center. This rule is however relaxed in the case of research scholars, who are regular and permanent teachers from Government and aided colleges affiliated to the 1st respondent University. Such research scholars are granted part-time registration based on their request and they are permitted to join the research center in the 3rd semester and do their course work in the 3rd and/or 4th semester. This provision is given to the teachers in the affiliated colleges to help them to do the course work, if they are selected by the UGC for FIP, evident from Ext.R1(b). That apart it is stated, petitioner is under the misconception that she being a part-time research scholar needs to do the course work in piece meal i.e. on Saturdays and other holidays and to complete a period equal to one semester within two years. 7. According to the respondents, even for part-time research scholars course work is full time. Therefore, they have to get relieved from their job and join the research center to do the course work continuously for one semester under the control of the Director of Research Center. 7. According to the respondents, even for part-time research scholars course work is full time. Therefore, they have to get relieved from their job and join the research center to do the course work continuously for one semester under the control of the Director of Research Center. Part-time research scholars have no special concession in doing course work compared to the full-time research scholars except that they are free to do the course work in the 3rd and/or 4th semester, a favour given apparently in anticipation of a chance for them to avail FIP and do the course work as full time. They are treated as full time research scholars during the time of doing course work. Rule 27 of the revised regulation for the Ph.D programme restrict employment of a full time research scholar except imparting instruction in an honorary capacity on a topic which forms the subject matter of research in the institution where she is working, evident from Ext.R1(c). That apart it is stated, petitioner was never instructed to do the course work in two spells as per Ext.P11. Ext.P11 is a later amendment of the regulation which the petitioner need not rely. It is for the petitioner either to opt the relaxations to the course work provided in Ext.P11 or to follow the 2010 regulation itself. Petitioner misunderstood the provisions of the regulations and completed the course work attending all the Saturdays and other holidays without the knowledge of the University. The attendance sheet demonstrating attendance of the petitioner is produced as Ext.R1(d). 8. It is also stated that, no other research scholars of the university have done the course work like the petitioner and the university cannot condone the action of the petitioner and the research center, as it is totally against the provisions of the UGC regulations and discriminatory to similarly placed research scholars. 9. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the University and perused the pleadings and documents on record. 10. Summary of the fact discussion made above would reveal that, the sole question to be considered in this case is whether the petitioner had undergone course work as is contemplated under Ext.P5 revised regulation issued by the UGC, and Ext.P7 notification issued by the 1st respondent University. 10. Summary of the fact discussion made above would reveal that, the sole question to be considered in this case is whether the petitioner had undergone course work as is contemplated under Ext.P5 revised regulation issued by the UGC, and Ext.P7 notification issued by the 1st respondent University. The course work defined under clause 13 of Ext.P4 regulation read thus: "After having been admitted, each M.Phil/Ph.D student shall be required by the Universities, Institutions, Deemed to be Universities and Colleges/Institutions of National Importance, as the case may be, to undertake course work for a minimum period of one semester. The course work shall be treated as pre M.Phil/Ph.D preparation and must include a course on research methodology which may include quantitative methods and Computer Applications. It may also involve reviewing of published research in the relevant field. The individual Universities, Institutions, Deemed to be Universities and Colleges/Institutions of National Importance, as the case may be, shall decide the minimum qualifying requirement for allowing a student to proceed further with the writing of the dissertation. If found necessary, course work may be carried out by doctoral candidate in sister Departments/Institutes either within or outside the University for which due credit will be given to them." 11. However, as per Ext.P5 a revision is made to Ext.P4 regulation and clause 10 of the revised regulation, course work is defined as follows: "Each student admitted to the Ph.D programme shall be required to undertake course work for a period of one semester within a continuous period of two semesters. The course work shall be organized by or under the supervision of the University Departments in the subjects coming under their purview as well as in allied and related subjects, as outlined in column 6 above. The course work shall be worth 12 credits and shall have the following components: (a) A course in research methodology (4 credits); (b) A course that will be in an area allied or related to the area of research (4 credits); and (c) A course in the area of research which will include detailed review of the current scholarly status in the area (4 credits)." 12. Petitioner has submitted an application pursuant to Ext.P6 notification issued by the 1st respondent University dated 29.6.2011, whereby applications were invited from eligible candidates for registration for research leading to Ph.D. Degree of the 1st respondent university as per revised regulation of 2010, wherein the registration for research is prescribed under clause 5, which read thus: "All candidates admitted to the Ph.D programmes of the University shall initially be registered as full time research scholars in the University Departments, where they will be undergoing course work in their subjects/in the broad area of their research. However, regular and permanent teachers from Government or Aided Colleges affiliated to M.G.University or from the University Department of Mahatma Gandhi University university, on their specific requests, will be permitted to join the Department in the third semester and do their course work in the third and/or fourth semester/s. Such candidates will be granted provisional registration for a year or till they are granted FIP/TFS, whichever is earlier." 13. Clause 8 therein deals with conversion of part-time research, which read thus: "All Ph.D students shall initially be registered for full-time research in the University Departments. After the Course work, the students can elect to shift to a Research Centre in an Affiliated College or in an institution recognized as a Research Centre." 14. Clause 12 deals with period of research, wherein the minimum period of research required by a candidate for submission of the thesis from the date of registration shall be 2 years (4 semesters) for M.Phil, M.Ed., M.Sc (by research), Master of Letters and M.Tech Degree holders if the research is in the subject in which the candidate has taken the above qualifying degree. In all other cases, minimum period of research required is three years (6 semesters) for thesis submission. Other parameters are stipulated therein with respect to other disciplines. Ext.P7 was issued by the 1st respondent University on 22.5.2012, whereby revised regulation for Ph.D. Registration and Award of the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy 2010 was published. Clause 1(iii) stipulates that, the said regulation applies for Ph.D. registrations granted in and after the July 2010 admissions, though some of the revised provisions pertaining to the modalities of constituting Doctoral Committees and organizing course work take effect only from 2011 and 2012 admissions. Clause 1(iii) stipulates that, the said regulation applies for Ph.D. registrations granted in and after the July 2010 admissions, though some of the revised provisions pertaining to the modalities of constituting Doctoral Committees and organizing course work take effect only from 2011 and 2012 admissions. Clause 9 therein deals with registration for research, which read thus: "All candidates admitted to the Ph.D programmes of the University shall be registered as full time research scholars, except regular and permanent teachers from the Government and Aided Colleges affiliated to Mahatma Gandhi University and from the University Departments, who shall be granted part-time registration if they so desire. They shall join the University department for the Research Centre concerned, as the case may be, on receipt of provisional registration orders issued by the office of the Director of Research/University office dealing with matters concerning research. The registration shall be confirmed on the successful completion of course work within the first two semesters (extendable by a year in the case of candidates who fail to clear the end-semester examination of the course work in the first chance). Provided that part-time research scholars (regular and permanent teachers from Government or Aided Colleges affiliated to Mahatma Gandhi University or from the University Departments of Mahatma Gandhi University) shall be permitted to do their course work in the first four semesters of the programme in accordance with the convenience of the Department/Research Centre (extendable by another year in the case of candidates who fail to clear the end-semester examination of the course work in the first chance.) Clause 10 deals with course work which reads as follows: "Each student, other than regular and permanent teachers from the Government and Aided Colleges affiliated to Mahatma Gandhi University and from the University Departments, who shall be granted part-time registration if they so desire, admitted to the Ph.D programme shall be required to undertake course work for a period of one semester within a continuous period of two semesters. The course work shall be organized by the University Departments for students registered at the Departments. Students registered at approved Research Centres shall undergo course work at their own Centres." 15. Ext.P8 submitted by the petitioner shows that, petitioner started the research from 22.6.2012 in the 3rd respondent college. The course work shall be organized by the University Departments for students registered at the Departments. Students registered at approved Research Centres shall undergo course work at their own Centres." 15. Ext.P8 submitted by the petitioner shows that, petitioner started the research from 22.6.2012 in the 3rd respondent college. Ext.P8 half yearly progress report shows that petitioner attended 41 days during the period from 22.6.2012 to 21.12.2012 and Ext.P9 shows that petitioner attended 68 working days during the period from 22.12.2013 to 30.6.2013 and certain details are specified with respect to the nature of work undertaken by the petitioner in Exts.P8 and P9. It is true, Ext.P10 certificate is issued by the Principal of 3rd respondent college dated 20.3.2014 wherein it is stated that, petitioner has completed the course work at the research center as stipulated by the M.G. University Revised Regulation for Ph.D. Registration and Award of Degree of Doctor of Philosophy, 2010 as per University order dated 22.5.2012 and it is certified that, she is eligible to appear for the course work examination. According to the petitioner, now the university is insisting the petitioner to follow the stipulations and parameters provided under Ext.P11 dated 11.6.2013 and Ext.P12 dated 19.6.2013 issued by the 1st respondent University, wherein certain changed circumstances is provided with respect to the course work to be undertaken. 16. However, the Standing Counsel for the University submitted that petitioner is under the mistaken impression that, petitioner need attend the course work during Saturdays and other holidays. It is the paramount contention of the learned standing counsel that, as per Ext.P5 Revised Regulation issued by the UGC, each student admitted to the Ph.D. Programme shall be required to undergo course work for a period of one semester within a continuous period of two semesters. According to the counsel, so far as the course work is concerned, even if petitioner is registered as a part- time research scholar, petitioner is liable to undergo continuous course work for one semester within a continuous period of two semesters. 17. On an evaluation of the rival submissions made across the Bar, I am of the considered opinion that, so far as the course work is concerned, petitioner has to undergo a continuous period of one semester within a continuous period of two semesters, as is stipulated in Ext.P5. 17. On an evaluation of the rival submissions made across the Bar, I am of the considered opinion that, so far as the course work is concerned, petitioner has to undergo a continuous period of one semester within a continuous period of two semesters, as is stipulated in Ext.P5. That apart petitioner could carry out the research programme in the 3rd respondent college by virtue of clause 11 in Ext.P5, whereby the scholars are permitted to carry on the research in a University Department or in a research centre in an affiliated college or in an institution recognized as research centre under these regulations. Apparently from Ext.R1(d) copy of attendance register, it is evident that, petitioner has attended the course work only on Saturdays and during holidays. The stipulation with respect to completion of course work as per Ext.P5 Revised Regulation has never undergone a change enabling the petitioner to attend the course work only on Saturdays and holidays. Therefore, even though Ext.P10 course completion certificate is issued by the Head of the 3rd respondent Institution, the same cannot be sustained in view of the stipulations contained under Exts.P5 and P7. In that view of the matter, it cannot be said that, the refusal of the 1st respondent University to permit the petitioner to participate in the examination is in any manner illegal, arbitrary or unfair. In my considered opinion, the UGC has prescribed certain stipulations and parameters in order to secure registration for Ph.D registration and Award of Degree of Doctorate. The said stipulations cannot be watered down for the reason that the scholars have to undertake the responsibilities prescribed thereunder and do the research in order to impart education and provide necessary instructions to students in the respective field. Therefore, no manner of relaxation and laxity can be shown with respect to the qualification prescribed after registration, in order to participate in the examination. 18. The discussion made above shows that there are no circumstances warranting interference in the action of the 1st respondent University not permitting the petitioner to write the examination. It is discernible from the interim orders dated 8.6.2014 and 9.6.2014, petitioner participated in the examination on securing requisite orders from this court. However, even though an order was passed by this court on 28.9.2015 to declare the result provisionally, that was not complied with by the University. It is discernible from the interim orders dated 8.6.2014 and 9.6.2014, petitioner participated in the examination on securing requisite orders from this court. However, even though an order was passed by this court on 28.9.2015 to declare the result provisionally, that was not complied with by the University. Sequel to the above discussion is, petitioner is not entitled to get any relief as is sought for in the writ petition. Resultantly, writ petition fails, accordingly it is dismissed.