The court held that the impugned circular was invalid as it misinterpreted the UGC Regulations 1985 (non-formal). The court found that the second part of Regulation 2(1) of the Regulations, which was omitted from the circular, allowed for individuals with no previous academic record to be eligible for admission to a first degree course through non-formal/distance education.

1. - Petitioner has preferred this writ petition for challenging Annex. 11, whereby the respondents published ranking list of employees for promotion to the cadre of Assistant, with the specific prayer to annul the same. Apart from the aforesaid prayer, the petitioner has also sought a declaration that Circular dated 26th of September 2011 (Annex. 12) is not applicable vis-a-vis the facts of the instant case, and/or in the alternative the same may be quashed and set aside to the extent it debars the petitioner from being considered for promotion in the cadre of Assistant. Some other ancillary reliefs are also incorporated in the prayer clause.

2. The facts, apposite for the purpose of this writ petition, are that at the inception of his service career, the petitioner was appointed as a subordinate staff with the respondent insurance Company in the month of September 1991 after acquiring qualification upto 8th standard. While serving the respondent, petitioner was keen to pursue his graduation course, and therefore, he made an endeavour to seek permission from the respondents by way of submitting an application in the year 1997. In his application, the petitioner has made it clear that he wants to pursue his graduation course from Indira Gandhi National Open University (IGNOU), and the permission sought for was granted to him. After due permission, petitioner undertook the entrance test known as Bachelor's Preparatory Programme (BPP), as the same is pre-requisite for those individuals who have not passed 10th and 12th standard at school level. On successful completion of BPP Entrance Examination in the year 1998, the petitioner started his degree course of Bachelor of Arts and completed it successfully in the year 2005. The IGNOU, thereupon, issued requisite mark sheet and certificate to the petitioner.

3. The Insurance Company floated the Promotion Policy for Supervisory, Clerical and Subordinate Staff, 2008 (for short 'Policy of 2008') offering advancement in the service career to the employees working in the cadres of supervisory, clerical and subordinate staff, which was duly approved by the Board of Directors of the respondent Company. In adherence of the Policy of 2008, taking into account eligibility of the petitioner, his name figured in the panel prepared for the purpose of promotion in the years 2008, 2009 and 2010, but his candidature did not find favour for promotion due to pendency of departmental enquiry. This enquiry ultimately resulted in indictment of the petitioner and he was awarded punishment of reduction in basic pay by three steps in the time scale by an order passed in March 2011. Being aggrieved of the said punishment, petitioner approached the appellate authority but so far the appeal remains inconclusive and nothing has turned out. The endeavour of the petitioner by referring to the panel for these three years is that his name was included in the panel amongst the candidates eligible for promotion in the cadre of Assistant. Apart from showing his eligibility for the purpose of promotion for all these three years, the petitioner has also placed on record the panel of all these three years in order to indicate that for all these three years in adherence of Para 17.2.1 of the Policy of 2008, he was granted 12 marks by treating him to be graduate. Yet again, in the year 2011, seven vacancies for unreserved category in the cadre of Assistant came into offing, and against these vacancies the petitioner offered his candidature. Considering the eligibility of the petitioner for promotion in the cadre of Assistant pursuant to the vacancies of the year 2011, he was allowed to appear in the computer proficiency and literacy test in pursuance of Para 15(b) of the Policy of 2008 on 3rd of October 2011, and on qualifying the same, his name was included in the panel. The panel was declared vide notice dated 10th of October 2011 (Annex. 8) and petitioner's name figured at Serial No. 29. In the panel Annex. 8, n