Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Jyotirmay Bhattacharya, Tapash Mookherjee, JJ.
Dr. Abdul Motin - Applicant
Versus
Dr. Manisankar Maiti & Ors. - Respondents
M.A.T. 1068 & 2007 of 2014 with C.A.N. 9459 & 11087 of 2014
Decided On : 24-12-2014
For the Applicant :Joydeep Kar, Ekramul Bari, K.M. Hossain, Advocates
For the Respondents No. 1:Rabilal Moitra, Kanailal Samanta, R.L. Moitra, Nivedita Roy, Advocates
For the College Service Commission :Pulak Ranjan Mondal, Bandana Das, Advocates
For the Netaji Subhas Open University :Santanu Kumar Patra, Tara Prasad Haldar, Advocates
For the Respondent No. 7:Tarun Kumar Das, Advocate
For the State :Joytosh Majumdar, Pinaki Dhole., Advocates
The Ph.D degree granted by an Open University cannot be accepted as a valid Ph.D degree for the post of Principal, as there is a vast difference in educational standard between regular courses and Distance Educational Programme.
Headnote:
Ph.D Degree - Open University - Acceptability as Principal Qualification - UGC Regulation 2010 - UGC Regulation 2009 - NET/SLET Clearance - Research Guidance - Eligibility Criteria.
Fact of the Case:
A writ petition was filed by Dr. Mani Sankar Maity, who ranked third in the panel prepared by the West Bengal College Service Commission for the post of Principal of non-Government Colleges affiliated to the Universities of the State of West Bengal, challenging the acceptability of the Ph.D degree granted by the Netaji Subhas Open University as an essential academic qualification for the post of Principal. Dr. Motin, who ranked second in the panel, was an ineligible candidate as his Ph.D degree from Netaji Subhas Open University could not be accepted as a valid Ph.D degree by the Commission.
Finding of the Court:
The Court held that the Ph.D degree granted by an Open University cannot be accepted as a valid Ph.D degree for the post of Principal. The Court relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Annamalai University v. the Secretary to the Government, Information and Tourism Department & Ors. reported in 2009(4) SC 590 and another Division Bench Decision of this Hon'ble court in the case of Sumana De v. State of West Bengal & Ors. reported in 2014 (CLT) 250 to conclude that there is a vast difference in educational standard between regular courses and Distance Educational Programme.
Issues: 1. Whether the Ph.D degree granted by the Netaji Subhas Open University can be accepted as a valid Ph.D degree for the post of Principal? 2. Whether the UGC Regulation of 2010 prescribes for Ph.D Degree in concerned/allied/relevant disciplines in the institution concerned as an essential qualification of the candidate?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Court held that the Ph.D degree granted by an Open University cannot be treated at par with the Ph.D degree granted by a conventional recognised University after completion of the Ph.D Programme conducted on regular basis. 2. The Court held that the UGC Regulation of 2010 prescribes for Ph.D Degree in concerned/allied/relevant disciplines in the institution concerned as an essential qualification of the candidate, but also prescribes for production of evidence of published work and research guidance.
Final Decision: The Court dismissed both the appeals filed by Dr. Motin and directed the College Service Commission to recast the panel in the light of the judgment and/or order passed by the learned Single Judge subject to the condition that Dr. Maity fulfils the requisite eligibility criteria for the post of Principal of the said college.
Jyotirmay Bhattacharya, J.
Two writ petitions were filed concerning an identical issue. One of such writ petitions was filed by Dr. Mani Sankar Maity who ranked third in the panel prepared by the West Bengal College Service Commission for the post of Principal of non-Government Colleges affiliated to the Universities of the State of West Bengal. He challenged the acceptability of the Ph. D degree granted by the Netaji Subhas Open University as an essential academic qualification for the post of Principal. According to him Dr. Motin who ranked second in the panel prepared by the concerned College Service Commission for the said post was an ineligible candidate as his Ph. D degree which he obtained from Netaji Subhas Open University cannot be accepted as a valid Ph. D degree by the Commission. He thus, contended that the first empanelled candidate, namely, Dr. Bhattacharya who having declined to accept the offer for his appointment for the post of Principal in Tampralipta Mahavidyalaya and the second empanelled candidate, namely, Dr. Motin being an ineligible candidate, appointment should have been offered to him, who was the third empanelled candidate. Accordingly he prayed for appropriate relief in his said writ petition which was registered as W.P No.20024(w) of 2012.
2. The other writ petition being W.P No.10296(w) of 2013 was filed by Dr. Motin, the appellant herein seeking issuance of direction upon the concerned authority for appointing him to the post of Principal in Tamralipta Mahavidyalaya as he ranked second in the panel and the first empanelled candidate refused to accept the offer of his appointment to the post of Principal in the said Tamralipta Mahavidyalaya.
3. Accordingly, both the aforesaid writ petitions were heard together by the Writ Court and both the writ petitions were disposed of by the learned Single Judge on 20th January, 2014. The writ petition filed by Dr. Maity being W.P No.20024(W) of 2012, was dismissed by the learned Single Judge by holding inter alia, that the Ph.D degree which was obtained by Dr. Motin from Netaji Subhas Open University cannot be accepted as a valid Ph.D degree for the post of Principal. Accordingly direction was given by the learned Single Judge of this court to recast the panel in the light of the discussion made by His Lordship in the impugned judgment. Simultaneously, the writ petition filed by Dr. Motin being W.P No.10296(W) of 2013 was rejected by the learned Single Judge of this Court for an identical reason. While disposing of both the writ petitions, His Lordship made it clear that the Ph.D degree granted by an Open University cannot be treated at par with the Ph.D degree granted by a formal conventional recognised University to the research scholar after completion of regular course successfully.
4. His Lordship further held that when the Ph. D and/or the M. Phil degree granted through a Distance Education Programme or through an Open University system is not recognised as an acceptable degree awarded by the College Service Commission for the post of lecturer, such a Ph. D and/or M. Phil degree obtained through Distance Education Programme or through an Open University system cannot be recognised as an acceptable degree for the post of Principal. According to His Lordship Ph.D Degree granted by an Open University and/or through Distance Education Programme to a Ph.D Scholar is a substandard educational qualification in comparison to the Ph.D Degree granted by formal conventional recognised University to the research scholar, after his successful completion of regular Ph.D course. This conclusion was drawn by His Lordship by following the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Annamali University v. the Secretary to the Government, Information and Tourism Department & Ors. reported in 2009(4) SC 590 and another Division Bench Decision of this Hon'ble court in the case of Sumana De v. State of West Bengal & Ors. reported in 2014 (CLT) 250. In fact, w
