Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 67 (ALL)

Kshana Mishra v. Union of India

2018-01-08

SUNITA AGARWAL

body2018
JUDGMENT & ORDER : SUNITA AGARWAL, J. 1. These two connected writ petitions have arisen from a common controversy. They have been heard together and are being decided by this common Judgment. 2. The petitioners are the candidates seeking their selection/enrollment in D. Phil Programme in the Sanskrit Department of the University. They had appeared in the entrance examinations for admission to D. Phil Programme 2016-17 namely CRET, 2016 having submitted a synopsis pursuant to the notification dated 30.1.2017. 3. According to the petitioners, their synopsis was to be evaluated by the Doctoral Programme Committee as per Ordinance LVI of the Ordinances of the University. They had appeared in the interview, held in the month of April, 2017 before the Doctoral Programme Committee and were waiting for their result. In the meantime, a news-item was published on 25.5.2017 in the daily newspaper 'Hindustan' notifying therein that the interview for CRET, 2016 held by the Doctoral Programme Committee was cancelled and a fresh interview would be held for all candidates who had qualified eligibility test for admission to D. Phil Programme. 4. It is contended by the petitioners that no notice or information was given to them individually. When they visited the Department of Sanskrit so as to confirm the said news, it was then informed that the interview held on 1.4.2017 was cancelled on the complaints of two candidates namely Sri Ankit Yadav and Sri Nitesh Agnihotri regarding the irregularities in the process of selection. The Doctoral Programme Committee was reconstituted and fresh interview was held in the month of May, 2017. The select list prepared was pasted on the notice board of the University. As a result of it, the petitioner Kshama Mishra had approached this Court in the month of June, 2017 with the prayer to cancel the entire select list dated 31.5.2017 pasted on the notice Board on 2.6.2017 prepared on the basis of the interview held on 26.5.2017. Another petitioner namely Aswita Tripathi filed writ petition in the month of November, 2017 with the same prayer. It is noteworthy that no letter of admission was issued to any of the candidates till date, pursuant to both the selection processes. 5. The basis of challenge to the subsequent selection process is the constitution of the Doctoral Programme Committee, reconstituted by the Vice Chancellor of the University. It is noteworthy that no letter of admission was issued to any of the candidates till date, pursuant to both the selection processes. 5. The basis of challenge to the subsequent selection process is the constitution of the Doctoral Programme Committee, reconstituted by the Vice Chancellor of the University. It is contended by the petitioners that the action of the Vice Chancellor in replacing four members of the Doctoral Programme Committee by two external members was beyond his powers under the Act, Statutes and Ordinances governing the field. 6. A counter affidavit dated 31.7.2017 was filed on behalf of the University by the Registrar, University of Allahabad, to submit that an enquiry was ordered by the Vice Chancellor of the University into the allegations made in the aforesaid complaints. Pursuant thereto, the Head of the Department of Sanskrit had submitted a report to the Vice Chancellor of the University. The said report disclosed that the allegations levelled against the then Doctoral Programme Committee of not following the prescribed criteria for selection were correct. As the allegations of irregularities made in the selection process against the then Doctoral Programme Committee were established, the Vice Chancellor of the University had proceeded to scrap the entire selection process and changed the Constitution of the said Committee in exercise of his powers under Section 14(3) of the University of Allahabad Act, 2005 (in short Act 2005). All the candidates were informed through SMS regarding the fresh date of interview and the result was prepared after proper evaluation and counselling of the candidates on the recommendation of the newly constituted Doctoral Programme Committee. 7. It is noteworthy that on 25.10.2017, after hearing the counsels for the parties, noticing the fact that the circumstances leading to the decision taken by the Vice Chancellor of the University remained unexplained in the counter affidavit of the University, this Court had directed the learned counsel appearing for the respondent-University to explain by means of a better affidavit as to under which statutory provision and authority, the constitution of the Doctoral Programme Committee was changed by the Vice Chancellor of the University. Despite repeated directions issued by this Court, no affidavit has been filed in compliance of the order dated 25.10.2017. 8. Despite repeated directions issued by this Court, no affidavit has been filed in compliance of the order dated 25.10.2017. 8. The counsel for the respondent-University, however, defended the action taken by the Vice Chancellor of the University in changing the constitution of Doctoral Programme Committee being in conformity with the powers conferred upon him under Section 14 (3) of the Act, 2005. It has been contended that out of six Professors in the Department, four were members of the originally constituted Doctoral Programme Committee against which there were complaints of irregularities. There was, thus, no option before the Vice Chancellor but to reconstitute the said Committee by inviting external experts. The Head of the Department of Sanskrit was though Convenor of the Doctoral Programme Committee by virtue of holding the post in view of Ordinance LVI of the Ordinances of the University but he did not interview a single candidate. The entire process was completed by the Committee comprising of two external experts under the approval of the Vice Chancellor of the University. 9. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 10. Before the Court dwell upon the submissions of the learned counsel for the University, it would be appropriate to go through the relevant provisions of the Act, Statutes and Ordinances which provide for the powers of the Vice Chancellor, the constitution of the Doctoral Programme Committee and the procedure, which is required to be followed for selection of candidates for admission to D. Phil Programme in the University. 11. As far as the scheme of the Act, 2005 is concerned, as per Section 12, the Vice Chancellor of the University is an Officer of the University. Section 14 (1) provides for appointment and powers of the Vice Chancellor of the University. Section 14 (2) provides that the Vice Chancellor is the Principal Executive and Academic Officer of the University to exercise general supervision and control over the affairs of the University and to give effect to the decisions of all the Authorities of the University. Section 14 (3) provides for emergency powers of the Vice Chancellor inasmuch as on any matter, where an immediate action is necessary, he can exercise any power conferred on any Authority of the University by or under the Act. He shall report to such Authority at its next meeting the action taken by him on such matters. Section 14 (3) provides for emergency powers of the Vice Chancellor inasmuch as on any matter, where an immediate action is necessary, he can exercise any power conferred on any Authority of the University by or under the Act. He shall report to such Authority at its next meeting the action taken by him on such matters. First proviso to sub-section (3) further specifies that the said exercise of power shall be made only in emergent situations and in no case the Vice Chancellor can exercise power in respect of creation and up-gradation of posts and in the matters of appointments thereto. Second proviso to sub-section (3) specifies that any action taken by the Vice Chancellor on behalf of any Authority of the University in case of any emergent situation reported to the Authority concerned if in its opinion ought not to have been taken, it may be referred to the Visitor whose decision thereon shall be final. Third proviso to Sub-section (3) provides for a right to appeal against action of the Vice Chancellor to the Executive Council which may confirm, modify or reverse the action taken by the Vice Chancellor. Sub-section (4) of Section 14 provides for the supervisory powers of the Vice Chancellor to see that every Authority of the University acts within the powers conferred upon it by the provisions of the Act, Statutes or the Ordinances and that every decision taken by it is in the interest of the University. Section 14(5) says that the Vice Chancellor of the University shall exercise such powers and perform such duties as prescribed by the Statutes or the Ordinances of the University. 12. Section 20 provides that the following shall be the Authorities of the University:- "(1) the Court; (2) the Executive Council; (3) the Academic Council; (4) the Boards of Faculties; (5) the Finance Committee; and (6) such other authorities as may be declared by the Statutes to be authorities of the University. " 13. Section 27 (a) & (b) provides for constitution, powers and functions of the Authorities and other Bodies of the University as may be constituted from time to time and further for appointment and continuance in office of the members of the said Authorities and Bodies. " 13. Section 27 (a) & (b) provides for constitution, powers and functions of the Authorities and other Bodies of the University as may be constituted from time to time and further for appointment and continuance in office of the members of the said Authorities and Bodies. The manner of filling of vacancies of members and all other matters relating to those Authorities and Bodies, as may be necessary and desirable, is to be provided by the Statutes. 14. The First Statutes of the University of Allahabad has been framed in exercise of powers under Section 28(1) and has been set out in the Schedule of the Act 2005. Under sub-section (2) of Section 28, the Executive Council of the University has been authorized to make new or additional Statutes or to amend or repeal First Statutes. As per proviso of sub-section (2) of Section 28, every amendment or change made in the First Statutes affecting the status, power or constitution of any Authority of the University can be made only after giving an opportunity of expressing an opinion in writing on the proposed changes and any opinion so expressed has to be considered by the Executive Council. Sub-section (3) of Section 28 requires assent of the Visitor for giving effect to new Statutes or addition to the existing Statutes or amendment or repeal of existing Statutes. Sub-section (4) of Section 28 further says that new Statutes or a Statute amending or repealing an existing Statute shall not be valid unless it receives assent of the Visitor. 15. Section 29(1) provides that the Ordinances framed subject to the provisions of the Act and the Statutes would deal with the matters relating to admission and enrollment of the students to the University and Institutions maintained by or admitted to its privileges; lay down the courses of study for all degrees, diplomas and certificates of the University. Section 29 (2) provides that the First Ordinances shall be made by the Vice Chancellor with the previous approval of the Central Government and the amendment, repeal or addition to the same at any time can be made by the Executive Council in the manner prescribed by the Statutes. 16. First Ordinances, namely, Ordinances LVI for admission to the academic programme leading to the Doctor of Philosophy (D. Phil) degree of the University has been framed under clause (d) of sub-section (1) of Section 29. 16. First Ordinances, namely, Ordinances LVI for admission to the academic programme leading to the Doctor of Philosophy (D. Phil) degree of the University has been framed under clause (d) of sub-section (1) of Section 29. The manner in which the First Ordinances made under Sub-section (2) of Section 29 may be amended, repealed or added by the Executive Council has been provided in Statute 40 of the First Statutes of the University as contained in the Schedule to the Act 2005. As per clause (2) of Statute 40, any amendment in the Ordinance can be made by the Executive Council only after a draft Ordinance is proposed by the Academic Council. Clause (3) and (4) of Statute 40 further provide that the Executive Council may reject the proposal or return the draft to the Academic Council for reconsideration either in whole or in part, together with any amendment suggested by it but it shall not have power to amend any draft or any Ordinance proposed by the Academic Council. 17. Insofar as the Ordinance LVI framed under clause (d) of sub-section (1) of Section 29 is concerned, the same provides for the complete procedure and manner in which an application for admission to D. Phil Programme of the University shall be considered. Relevant clauses (1) (2) & (3) of the Ordinances LVI dealing with the admission and enrollment of candidate to the D. Phil Programme of the University are reproduced as under:- "1. Relevant clauses (1) (2) & (3) of the Ordinances LVI dealing with the admission and enrollment of candidate to the D. Phil Programme of the University are reproduced as under:- "1. (a) An applicant for admission to the academic programme leading to the Doctor of Philosophy (D. Phil.) degree of the University (hereinafter in this Ordinance referred to as "the applicant") shall not be considered for such admission, except if he- (i) holds, in the concerned subject or in a cognate or anallied subject, the Master's degree or a degree recognised by the University as equivalent thereto, awarded by the University or by any other University or institution of higher learning recognised by the University in that regard, and fulfils other conditions of eligiblility laid down by this Ordinance or, in furtherance of the same, by the Academic Council by Regulations: Provided that any question, as to whether the subject professed by the applicant is a cognate or an allied subject, shall be referred to the Academic Council for decision; (ii) has submitted an application, on the Form, in the manner and according to the schedule laid down by the Vice-Chancellor by standing orders. - 1. In the case of a Department not under a University Collage, or in the case of a School, to the Registrar; 2. In the case of a Department under a University College, to the Principal; or 3. - 1. In the case of a Department not under a University Collage, or in the case of a School, to the Registrar; 2. In the case of a Department under a University College, to the Principal; or 3. In case of a University Institute, an independent Centre or a Constituent Institute, to the Director or the Head, as the case may be: Provided that an applicant in employment shall be subject to the provisions of sub-clause (c); (iii) has qualified in a preliminary test or assessment (hereafter in this Ordinance referred to as "the eligibility test"), if any, organised by the University for one or more of the units specified in serial number (ii), in accordance with the provisions made by the Academic Council by Regulations or, pending the same, in accordance with the directions of the Vice- Chancellor, which shall be reported to the Academic Council: Provided that where such eligibility test is organised, the application, referred to in serial number (ii), in respect of the applicants within the ambit of the eligibility test, shall be submitted to the office specified in that regard: Provided further that regularly appointed teachers of the University, including an institution maintained by it, or of an institution admitted to its privileges, may be exempted from such eligibility test: Provided also that international students may be exempted from such eligibility test and that the admission of the international students so exempted shall be in accordance with the rules in that regard framed by the International Students Advisory Board and reported to the Academic Council; (iv) fulfils the requirements in respect of his academic record laid down by the Academic Council by Regulations or, pending the same, by the Vice-Chancellor; and (v) possesses, in the opinion of the Doctoral Programme Committee, referred to in sub-clause (a) of clause 2, and of the Research Degree Committee, referred to in sub-clause (b) of clause 3, the requisite qualifications, aptitude and capability for pursuing the D. Phil. Programme in the concerned subject. (b) All applicants admitted to the D. Phil. programme shall fulfil the requirement, specified in sub-clause (a) of clause 4, of residence within the area assigned to the territorial jurisdiction of the University. (c) An applicant in employment shall not be considered for admission to the D. Phil. Programme in the concerned subject. (b) All applicants admitted to the D. Phil. programme shall fulfil the requirement, specified in sub-clause (a) of clause 4, of residence within the area assigned to the territorial jurisdiction of the University. (c) An applicant in employment shall not be considered for admission to the D. Phil. programme, except upon submitting a 'No Objection' Certificate of his employer, affirming- (i) in case such employment is within the area referred to in sub-clause(b), that the applicant shall, upon such admission, be provided facility to report to the unit where he is enrolled, and to attend the course-work and other academic activities, within or outside such area, in connection with research work for the D. Phil. Programme, as prescribed by, or under, this Ordinance and the Regulations, and that the applicant shall, if transferred out of the said area before completing the requirement of residence specified in sub-clause (a) of clause 4, be granted leave of an appropriate duration in order to fulfil the said requirement; or (ii) in case such employment is outside the said area, that the applicant shall be granted leave of absence for the requisite period in order to fulfil such requirement of residence: Provided that a teacher referred to in the second proviso to serial number (iii) of sub-clause (a), shall not be required to submit such 'No Objection Certificate', but his application shall require the endorsement of- (i) the Head of his Department, in the case of a Department not under a University College; (ii) the Principal of his University College, in the case of a Department under a University College; (iii) the Director of his University Institute or Constituent Institute, or the Head of His Independent Centre, as the case be; or (iv) the Principal of his Constituent College. 2. (a) The applications of the applicants who have qualified in the eligibility test, and of the applicants exempted there from, shall be placed before the relevant Doctoral Programme Committee of the concerned Department, University Institute, independent Centre, School, or Constituent Institute (hereafter in this Ordinance referred to as "the academic entity"). 2. (a) The applications of the applicants who have qualified in the eligibility test, and of the applicants exempted there from, shall be placed before the relevant Doctoral Programme Committee of the concerned Department, University Institute, independent Centre, School, or Constituent Institute (hereafter in this Ordinance referred to as "the academic entity"). (b) The Doctoral Programme Committee shall be constituted, in the case of - (i) a Department, by the Departmental Committee with the concurrence of the Board of the concerned Faculty; or (ii) any other academic entity, by the Director, the Head or the Coordinator, as the case may be, with the concurrence of the competent executive or academic body thereof: Provided that a separate Doctoral Programme Committee may be constituted for a Centre of a University Institute or for a distinct unit of teaching and research under a Constituent Institute: Provided further that where a Department, a Centre of a University Institute, an independent Centre or a School, imparts instruction in more than one subject for the Master's degree, a separate Doctoral Programme Committee may be constituted for each such subject in which the D. Phil. programme is offered. (c) The Doctoral Programme Committee shall comprise up to four members from amongst the senior-most teachers of the concerned academic entity who profess the subjects or areas of research assigned to the Doctoral Programme Committee, of whom one shall be nominated as the Convenor, and may also include one external member, professing a subject with a bearing on the said subjects or areas, from amongst the serving or locally resident former teachers of any such academic entity or the locally resident serving or former teachers of an institution of higher learning: Provided that the Head of the Department, the Director of the University Institute or the Coordinator of a Centre thereof, the Head of the independent Centre, the Coordinator of the School, or the Director of a Constituent Institute shall, if he is a member of the Doctoral Programme Committee thereof, be the Convenor. (d) The members of the Doctoral Programme Committee, other than a member ex officio, shall have a term of two years, which may be extended in specific cases for similar periods, and the constitution thereof for each such term shall be reported to the Board of the Concerned Faculty in the case of a Department or the respective competent executive or academic bodies in the case of the other academic entities. (e) The Doctoral Programme Committee shall-- (i) review the applications, referred to in sub-clause (a), and interview such of the concerned applicants as are found to be eligible for admission under the provisions of sub-clause (a) of clause 1 and other provisions of the Ordinance and the provisions of the Regulations; (ii) draw up, on the basis of the criteria laid down by the Academic Council or pending the same, by the Departmental Committee, under intimation to the Board of the concerned Faculty, in the case of a Department, or by the respective competent executive or academic bodies in the case of the other academic entities, the priority order of the applicants so interviewed for each subject or area of research; and (iii) prepare the list of applicants recommended for admission, in accordance with the vacancies available under the persons eligible to supervise research for the D. Phil. programme (hereafter in this Ordinance referred to as "the supervisors") in the concerned academic entity, and indicate in such list, in respect of each applicant, the proposed supervisor who has consented to supervise the applicant, and the proposed topic of research assigned in consultation with such supervisor. (f) The qualifications of the supervisors, referred to in serial number (iii) of sub-clause (e), and other relevant conditions in respect thereof, shall be determined by the Rules set out in SCHEDULE I to this Ordinance. (g) The Academic Council may by Regulations provide for the appointment of a co-supervisor for the candidate in specified cases, and where the Academic Council so provides, the appointment of the co-supervisor shall be in accordance with the Rules in that regard, as set out in SCHEDULE I to this Ordinance, subject to the modifications made in the same by such Regulations. (h) The Doctoral Programme Committee shall monitor the work and progress of each applicant admitted to the D. Phil. (h) The Doctoral Programme Committee shall monitor the work and progress of each applicant admitted to the D. Phil. programme, in consultation with the supervisor, and shall advise such admitted applicant, the through his supervisor, on any aspect of his work and progress that may appear to it to be unsatisfactory or in default of the requirements of this Ordinance and the Regulations, and shall, in addition to the functions specified in this Ordinance, perform such functions as may be assigned by the Academic Council by Regulations. 3. (a) The list of applicants referred to in serial number (iii) of sub-clause (e) of clause 2. along with the application of each such applicant, and a synopsis of the research proposal drawn up by him, shall be forwarded to the Research Degree Committee, in the case of a Department by the Head thereof, through the Dean of the Faculty, or in the case of the other academic entities by the Director, the Head or the Coordinator, as the case may be: Provided that the said synoposis shall ordinarily be in not more than 2000 words, and shall present a review of the literature and current state of knowledge on the proposed topic of research, the objectives and plan of research, the sources or methodology proposed to be employed in the investigation and such other information as may be relevant in that regard. (b) The Research Degree Committee shall comprise- (i) the Vice-Chancellor or, where the Vice-Chancellor so directs, the Pro-Vice-Chancellor (Chairperson): (ii) The Dean of the concerned Faculty, or the Director of the concerned University Institute or Constituent Institute, or the Head of the concerned independent Centre, or the Chairperson of the Advisory Committee of the concerned School; (iii) the Head of the concerned Department, or the Convenor of the concerned Doctoral Programme Committee of an academic entity other than a Department, but where such Convenor is already a member under serial number (ii), the senior-most member of the Doctoral Programme Committee, from amongst the teachers of the said academic entity, shall be the member of the Research Degree Committee: Provided that where, in the case of a Department, the applicant is being considered for admission to a subject other than that in which he holds the Master's or equivalent, degree, the Head of the Department to which the subject of such degree is assigned shall be an additional member of the Research Degree Committee; (c) The Research Degree Committee shall examine the list, the applications and the synopses referred to in sub-clause (a), with reference to the provisions of this Ordinance and the Regulations, and grant admission to such of the applicants as are, in its judgment, qualified for the same, determine the names of the supervisors and also finalise the research topics of each admitted applicant (hereafter in this Ordinance referred to as "the candidate"): Provided that the Research Degree Committee may also, while granting such admission, determine the language or languages, in which the candidate is, or all candidates of a particular subject are, required to have proficiency for the proper pursuit of research work, and any such candidate shall not be permitted to submit his thesis for the D. Phill. Degree (hereafter in this Ordinance referred to as "the thesis"), except if he adduces, through his supervisor, a Certificate of Proficiency in the concerned language or languages, which has been issued, after a duly conducted examination, by the University or an institution recognized by the University, or other proof, to the satisfaction of the Research Degree Committee, of having acquired such proficiency. (d) The proceedings of the Research Degree Committee, in respect of the matters referred to in sub-clause (c), shall be reported in the case of a Department to the Board of the concerned Faculty, or in the case of any other academic entity to the concerned competent executive or academic body. (e) In furtherance of the decision of the Research Degree Committee to grant admission to a candidate, the Registrar shall issue a letter of admission to him, specifying the name of his supervisor, the topic of his research, the academic entity where he shall be enrolled, the language or languages, if any, in which he is required to acquire proficiency, and the period, ordianrily of not more than one month, within which he is required to get himself enrolled for the D. Phil. Programme at such academic entity after paying fees and completing other requisite formalities: Provided that where the candidate gets himself so enrolled within the said period, his enrolment shall be with effect from the date of the meeting of the Research Degree Committee that granted his admission, but in all other cases the said enrolment shall be with effect from the actual date thereof. " 18. A careful perusal of the Scheme of the Act, Statute and Ordinances framed for admission to the D. Phil Programme of the University makes it clear that the application of each applicant, who has qualified the preliminary test or the eligibility test conducted by the University, has to be placed before the Doctoral Programme Committee of the concerned Department. The constitution of the Doctoral Programme Committee for each Department has been provided in the Ordinances itself. The term of members of the Doctoral Programme Committee, which shall comprise of upto four members, is fixed for two years which may be extended in a specified case for similar periods. Any change in the constitution of the Doctoral Programme Committee for each such term has to be reported to the Board of the concerned Faculty in the case of a Department of the University. The constitution and term of office of members of the Board of each Faculty of the Department is also to be prescribed by the Ordinances. First Board of each Faculty has been nominated by the Executive Council which shall hold office for a period of one year. 19. The constitution and term of office of members of the Board of each Faculty of the Department is also to be prescribed by the Ordinances. First Board of each Faculty has been nominated by the Executive Council which shall hold office for a period of one year. 19. The Doctoral Programme Committee is to prepare a list of recommendees for admission to D. Phil Programme after review of the applications and interview of the concerned applicants on the basis of the criteria laid down by the Academic Council. The recommendations of the Doctoral Programme Committee is to be placed before the Research Degree Committee which shall comprise of the Vice Chancellor; the Dean of the concerned Faculty and the Head of the concerned Department. 20. Finally, the admission list has to be prepared by the Research Degree Committee after examining the list of recommendees, the applications and the synopsis submitted by the applicants with reference to the provisions of the Ordinances and the Regulations framed, if any. The proceedings of the Research Programme Committee to finalise the list for admission to the candidates is to be reported to the Board of concerned Faculty. The letter of admission to the candidates are then issued by the Registrar as per the list finalized by the Research Degree Committee. 21. In the light of the aforesaid provisions pertaining to the procedure for admission in D. Phil course provided in the Ordinances and the relevant provisions of the Act, 2005 and Statutes made there under, it is clear that a complete and exhaustive procedure has been laid down therein for change of constitution of the Doctoral Programme Committee where for the concurrence of the Board of concerned Faculty is required. The Vice Chancellor of the University was not empowered to change the constitution of the Doctoral Programme Committee or curtail the term of its members on his own. The emergency powers under Section 14(3) of the Act can be invoked by the Vice Chancellor in an emergent situation where immediate action is necessary. Being the principal Executive Officer of the University having supervisory authority and control over the affairs of the University, it is the duty of the Vice Chancellor to give effect to the decision of all the authorities of the University. Being the principal Executive Officer of the University having supervisory authority and control over the affairs of the University, it is the duty of the Vice Chancellor to give effect to the decision of all the authorities of the University. It has to ensure that every authority of the University act within its powers conferred by the provisions of the Act, the Statutes or the Ordinances and every decision taken by it is in the interest of the University. 22. In the instant case, the complaints of two applicants appended with the counter affidavit, to explain the nature of emergency which impelled the Vice Chancellor to exercise his powers under Section 14(3) of the Act, are found to be vague. The alleged enquiry report which was the basis of decision taken by the Vice Chancellor to scrap the recommendation of the Doctoral Programme Committee is not on record. The material to disclose as to what had travelled in the minds of the Vice Chancellor to invoke his discretion in the fact-situation of the case is also not borne out from the records. It is settled Principle that whenever the Act prescribes a particular body to exercise the power to do certain thing in a certain way, it must be exercised by that particular body in that particular manner. Any other method of performance by any other body unless delegated under the law provided for such delegation is completely forbidden. Reference may be to Taylor Vs. Taylor,1875 1 ChD 426 wherein the said proposition of law was first stated and had been adopted later by the Judicial Committee in Nazir Ahmad Vs. King Emperor, (1936) AIR PC 253. The said principle has been reiterated in a series of Judgments in Rao Shiv Bahadur Singh Vs. State of Vindhya Pradesh, (1954) AIR SC 322, State of U. P. Vs. Singhara Singh, (1964) AIR SC 358, Chandra Kishore Jha Vs. Mahavir Prasad, (1999) 8 SCC 266 , Dhanajaya Reddy Vs. State of Karnataka, (2001) 4 SCC 9 , Gujarat Urja Vikas Nigam Ltd. Vs. Essar Power Ltd. , (2008) 4 SCC 755 and Hussein Ghadially alias M. H. G. A. Shaikh and others Vs. State of Gujarat, (2014) 8 SCC 425 . 23. Mahavir Prasad, (1999) 8 SCC 266 , Dhanajaya Reddy Vs. State of Karnataka, (2001) 4 SCC 9 , Gujarat Urja Vikas Nigam Ltd. Vs. Essar Power Ltd. , (2008) 4 SCC 755 and Hussein Ghadially alias M. H. G. A. Shaikh and others Vs. State of Gujarat, (2014) 8 SCC 425 . 23. In view of the above discussion, the Court comes to an irresistible conclusion that the emergency power conferred upon the Vice Chancellor of the University had been exercised in a routine manner which was not permitted at all. In any case, it was not open for the Vice Chancellor of the University to amend the constitution of the Doctoral Programme Committee curtailing the term of its members which was fixed for two years under the Ordinances that too on the vague complaints of alleged irregularities committed during the course of interview made by two applicants who were seeking their admission in D. Phil course. Apart from the aforesaid stand taken in the counter affidavit, no other explanation has been offered nor any record has been produced before the Court despite time granted to the counsel for the respondent-University. The procedure adopted by the Vice Chancellor in changing the constitution of the Departmental Committee is not even disclosed in the counter affidavit. 24. In the aforesaid circumstances, this Court is of the considered opinion that the entire decision-making process leading to the order passed by the Vice Chancellor in setting aside the recommendation of the then Doctoral Programme Committee and reconstituting it for Department of Sanskrit by invoking emergency power under Section 14 (3) of the Act suffers from manifest error of jurisdiction. The Act of the Vice Chancellor being without any authority, the defect cannot be cured by ratification. The recommendation of the newly constituted two members Doctoral Programme Committee pursuant to the interview taken by it and the result prepared thereon dated 31.5.2017 pasted on the Notice Board dated 2.6.2017, therefore, cannot be sustained. It is admitted to the learned counsel for the parties that on the basis of the said result, no admission in the D. Phil Course in the Department of Sanskrit has been made so far. 25. It is admitted to the learned counsel for the parties that on the basis of the said result, no admission in the D. Phil Course in the Department of Sanskrit has been made so far. 25. In view of the above, while allowing both the writ petitions, following directions are issued:- (i) The recommendations of the originally constituted Doctoral Programme Committee, along with the applications and synopsis of all applicants/recommendees shall be placed before the Research Degree Committee, which shall prepare a final list of candidates after perusal thereof under due intimation to the Board of Faculty of the Department of Sanskrit. (ii) The Registrar, University of Allahabad, Allahabad shall then issue letter of admission to the candidates in furtherance of the decision of the Research Degree Committee. (iii) The entire exercise shall be completed within a period of three weeks from the production of certified copy of this order.