Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
N.Nagaresh, J.
A.A. Gopi - Petitioner
Versus
Mahatma Gandhi University And Ors. – Respondents
WP(C) NO. 19951 OF 2024
Decided On : 20-12-2024
(A) Mahatma Gandhi University Ph.D Regulations, 2016 - Clauses 24.3 and 32.2 - Cancellation of Ph.D registration - Petitioner's registration cancelled for alleged lack of attendance without prior notice or inquiry by Doctoral Committee - Regulations require specific reasons and corrective measures before cancellation. (Paras 10, 11, 14, 17)
(B) University Grants Commission Act, 1956 - Section 26(1) - Regulations framed under this section govern the cancellation of research scholar registration. (Paras 13)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner, a Research Scholar, challenged the cancellation of his Ph.D registration due to alleged unsatisfactory performance, claiming no prior notice or corrective measures were suggested.
Findings of Court:
The court found no illegality in the cancellation as it was based on the recommendation of the supervising teacher, in accordance with the regulations.
Issues: Whether the cancellation of registration was justified without prior inquiry or notice to the petitioner.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the cancellation under Regulation 32.2 did not require the same procedural safeguards as Regulation 24.3, which mandates a Doctoral Committee's involvement.
Result: Writ petition dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
N. NAGARESH, J.
The petitioner, a Research Scholar, has approached this Court seeking to quash Ext.P1 and to direct the respondents to restore the registration of the petitioner cancelled as per Ext.P1.
2. The petitioner is an Assistant Professor of Department of Philosophy of the Sree Sankaracharya University of Sanskrit, Kalady. The petitioner states that he is a Research Scholar. He obtained registration (2020 Admission) for Ph.D Degree at the School of Gandhian Thought and Development Studies in Mahatma Gandhi University, Kerala.
3. The petitioner states that he was doing research studies diligently and seriously. In the meanwhile, the petitioner was served with Ext.P1 order dated 31.10.2022 cancelling the Ph.D registration of the petitioner alleging lack of regular attendance in research activities.
4. The petitioner states that Ext.P1 order was issued without any show-cause notice regarding the alleged unsatisfactory performance of the petitioner. The petitioner therefore submitted Ext.P2 representation with the 2nd respondent-Vice Chancellor. The petitioner had undergone treatment for post traumatic pain (neck and upper back) and was advised to avoid strenuous work and long distance travelling.
5. The petitioner was issued with Ext.P4 memo informing that there are no prevailing rules enabling to revive the cancelled research registration. The petitioner submits that Ext.P1 order is issued in violation of Ext.P5 Mahatma Gandhi University Ph.D Regulations, 2016. To cancel the registration, a Doctoral Committee / Research Advisory Committee shall record reasons and suggest corrective measures. The petitioner was never intimated of the lack of attendance / unsatisfactory performance by the Doctoral Committee / Research Advisory Committee.
6. The petitioner had genuine medical problems during the period. The petitioner relied on the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in W.P.(C) No.11255/2023 in which, in similar circumstances, the High Court had held that cancellation of Ph.D registration of the petitioner therein was not done in the manner envisaged by Clause 10(b) of Ordinance IX of the Ordinances of the JMI.
7. The 3rd respondent resisted the writ petition filing counter affidavit. The 3rd respondent stated that UGC Regulations and its amendments from time to time are framed by the UGC after detailed deliberations. The Regulations cannot be overlooked at any stage. All Universities / Institutions / Colleges have to strictly comply with the Regulations.
8. Respondents 1 and 2 submitted that as per Clause 32.2 of the Mahatma Gandhi University Ph.D Regulations, 2016, the Vice Chancellor can cancel registration of any research student for unsatisfactory progress in research or conduct of the scholar, on recommendations of the research supervising teacher. Respondents 2 and 3 submitted that the research centre has not sent any intimation regarding the absence of the Research Scholar. In the first spell of the Ph.D Course work (i.e., from 01.01.2022 to 30.06.2022), the petitioner attended the class from 11.05.2022 to 06.06.2022. The petitioner did not attend Ph.D Course work classes in the second semester from 01.01.2023 to 30.06.2023.
9. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the respective Standing Counsel appearing for respondents 1 to 3.
10. The registration of the petitioner to do the research work stands cancelled as per Ext.P1. Ext.P1 would indicate that the petitioner was granted registration for research under the supervision of Dr. Abhilash G. Nath at School of Gandhian Thought and Development Studies. On 12.08.2022, the research guide requested to cancel the Ph.D registration of the petitioner and two others, for the reason that they lacked regular attendance in research activities. Ext.P1 order would indicate that the cancellation of registration was effected as per Regulation 32.2 of the Mahatma Gandhi University Ph.D Regulations, 2016.
11. The petitioner relies on Regulation 24.3 of the Re
Cancellation of Ph.D registration under Regulation 32.2 does not require prior inquiry or corrective measures unlike Regulation 24.3, as per the court's interpretation.
The cancellation of Ph.D. registration was upheld based on the unsatisfactory performance of the petitioner and the university's adherence to proper procedure.
The tenure of a research Scholarship shall be three years counted from the date of joining. The initial award shall however, be released for one year and then renewed from year to year up to the thir....
Students cannot be penalized for institutional errors, especially after years of study, as it undermines the pursuit of essential research work.
Principles of natural justice necessitate an opportunity to be heard before cancellation of admission; failure to provide this renders the decision invalid.
Admission to academic programs must adhere to the prescribed procedures and regulations, and any deviation from the same may be considered a backdoor entry, leading to cancellation of admission.
The court held that the best interests of the petitioner and society justified the renewal of her Ph.D registration despite previous failures and non-compliance with requirements.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
