IMPORTANT POINT
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of University Grants Commission regulations on the university's admission procedure, emphasizing the importance of following the prescribed criteria for admission.

JUDGMENT :

Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice

1. The present writ appeal arises out of order dated 24/01/2024 passed by the learned Single Judge in WPC No.3124 of 2023 (Anjali Tiwari and Anr. Vs. Guru Ghasidas University and ors.).

2. In this appeal, the appellant has made the following prayer -

“It is, therefore, prayed that, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow the appeal and set aside the order impugned dated 24/01/2024 (Annexure A/1) passed by the Hon’ble Single Bench of this Hon’ble Court in WP (C) No.3124/2023 in the interest of justice.”

3. Facts of the case in brief is that the appellants are the students pursuing B.Sc. from the respondent/university passed out in the year 2023 and they were desirous to pursue Ph.D. in the ield of Biotechnology. In pursuance to the advertisement along with guidelines issued by Registrar of Guru Ghasidas University for pursuing Ph.D. present appellants applied and appeared in the examination under VRET category (written examination). According to the guidelines, the selection of VRET candidates shall be on the basis of 70% of marks obtained through the written examination and the remaining 30% from the interview. The University allowed 02 seats for the VRET Category (unreserved) and for the exempted category 05 seats were allocated for the Biotechnology subject. The written examination was conducted on 08/04/2023 and the results were declared on 18/04/2023. The appellants were declared as the merit holders for the said examination. Appellant No.1 secured 73 marks out of 100 and appellant No.2 scored 72 marks out of total of 49 students. Respondent No.4 scored 61 marks, respondent No.5 scored 46 marks. The interview was scheduled on 14th and 15th June, 2023 for qualified candidates of the VRET examination. The interview was conducted by a Committee of 5 members and the final results were declared on 19/06/2023. Thereafter, respondents 4 and 5 were selected for the VRET category.

4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the selection process is an absolute act of favoritism and the learned Single Judge failed to appreciate the fact that the respondent/University has applied incorrect methods to award marks. It is submitted that the present appellants were toppers in the written examination whereas respondents 4 and 5 were placed at Serial No.11 and 33 respectively and they have been selected by the respondent/University by awarding higher marks in the interview. He further submitted that the learned Single Judge had not considered the contentions and pleas of the appellants that appellants 1 and 2 have been awarded 09 average marks in the interview out of 30 whereas respondent No.4 has scored 25 marks out of 30 and respondent No.5 has scored 29 marks out of 30 which would clearly show biasness and favoritism. He further submitted that the learned Single Judge did not appreciate the factual position that no reservation roster has been applied in the selection process, therefore, no relaxation can be given. He goes on to submit that the procedure for awarding the marks for admission of the candidates for pursuing Ph.D. program is contrary to the University Grants Commission (Minimum Standards and Procedures for Award of Ph.D. Degree) Regulations, 2022 (for short Regulation, 2022). Therefore, he prayed that the appeal may be allowed and impugned order may be set aside.

5. Learned counsel for respondent 1 to 3 submitted that the interview was conducted by the Committee of 05 Members and respondents No.4 and 5 scored higher marks than the appellants. He would further argue that the award of higher marks cannot be a ground to challenge the selection of respondents No.4 and 5. It is stated that 70% weightage would be given to the marks obtained in online VRET, whereas for personal interviews/viva- voce/presentation, 30 marks have been allocated and thus total marks would be 100. He would further contend that 70% marks obtained by the candidates in the written examination and the marks