AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The matter comes up on an application preferred under Section 5 of the Limitation Act.
For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed. The delay caused in filing the appeal is condoned.
With the consent of learned counsel for both the parties, the matter is heard finally.
The appellant-University has preferred the instant appeal claiming following relief:-
"It is, therefore, humbly prayed that this special appeal may kindly be allowed. The impugned interlocutory order dated 0312.2019 passed by Hon'ble Single Judge may kindly be declared illegal and the same may kindly be set aside."
The interim order dated 03.12.2019 passed by Hon'ble Single Judge reads as under :-
"Mr. Jain, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that as a consequence of the interim order dated 29.08.2019, passed by this Court and in view of the decision dated 31.10.2019, taken by the Committee constituted by the Vice Chairman, the petitioner is entitled to a provisional certificate.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties and upon perusal of the material available on record, this Court finds substance in what has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner. Hence, considering it to be expedient, the respondent - University is directed to issue 'provisional certificate of completing h.D. in accordance with UGC Regulations, 2009' in favour of the petitioner. While issuing the certificate, the respondent - University shall, however, make a note about pendency of the present writ petition.
Needless to observe that such certificate shall remain subject to ultimate decision of the present writ petition.
Second stay application stands allowed accordingly.
Connect with SB Civil Writ Petition No.7936/2017 (Usha Rathore Vs. Registrar, JNVU, Jodhpur & Anr.)."
Counsel for the appellant Shri Rajesh Panwar submits that UGC Regulations do not permit awarding of Ph.D., degree at all to the writ-petitioner, as no written test/entrance test was conducted by the University, and therefore, the interim order is not in consonance with law.
Counsel for the appellant further submits that the Regulations are mandatory in nature and unless those are complied with, no sort of degree can be issued by the University. Thus, if compliance of interim order is made, it would create a complex situation for the University as Ph.D., degree can't be issued without adhering the mandatory UGC Regulations.
Counsel for the respondent Shri Nihar Jain submits that the respondent was registered as Ph.D. scholar on 13.11.2009 and it was in accordance with the decision taken by the University in the departmental council meeting dated 09.08.2011, which is Annex.3 of the writ petition that they were allowed to complete their Ph.D.
Counsel for the respondent further submits that studentpetitioner adhered with all the terms and conditions as laid down by the University, and therefore, was issued a provisional certificate granting her Ph.D., on 08.08.2013. Thereafter in a belated decision taken by the Vice Chancellor on 09.05.2017, the earlier decision of 09.08.2011, which was by the departmental council was cancelled.
After hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing record of the case, we are of the considered opinion that it will not be appropriate to express any opinion at this stage on merits of the case since the writ petition is under adjudication before the Hon'ble single Judge. The impugned order was only to protect the Ph.D., scholar's provisional certificate of Ph.D., which the appellant University itself granted on 08.08.2013.
In light of the aforesaid observations, no interference is called for in the present appeal and the same is accordingly dismissed.