Point of Law: Education Law - Admission - Integrated Ph.D. programme on part time - Statutes and Regulations - It is well settled that if the provision of law is explicitly clear, unambiguous and interpretation leaves no room for more than one construction, it has to be read as it is. In that case, provision of law has to be tested on touchstone of relevant provisions of law or of constitution as case may be and it is not open for Court to invoke doctrine of ‘reading down’ with a view to save statute from declaring it ultra vires by carrying it to point of “ perverting purpose of statute.

JUDGMENT :

1) The petitioner is aggrieved and has assailed the decision of the Board of Research Studies in Centre of Central Asian Studies (CCAS, for short) dated 7th of September, 2017, whereby and where-under request of the petitioner to join three years Integrated Ph.D. programme on part time basis without putting in residency period has been rejected.

2) Before adverting to and with a view to better appreciate the grounds of challenge urged by the petitioner to assail the impugned decision, it would be appropriate to notice few material facts as are necessary for disposal of this petition.

3) Petitioner holds Post Graduate Degree in Library and Information Science from University of Kashmir. It is on the basis of this qualification, the petitioner has been appointed as Junior Professional Assistant on contract basis in the Institute of Home Sciences vide order No.F(cont/gen.Admn)KU/12 dated 04.10.2012.

4) The Dean Faculty of Arts (now Social Science) vide his Advertisement Notice No.F(Adm'3’years integrated Ph.D. Programme)Res/KU/14 dated 30.12.2014, invited applications from the desirous candidates for admission to Three Years? Integrated Ph.D. Programme, inter alia, in the Faculty of Arts. The Faculty of Arts, for which applications were invited, also included the discipline of Library and Information Science.

5) The petitioner, who claims to be eligible in terms of the aforesaid Advertisement Notice, also submitted his application form. He was ultimately selected by the Dean concerned, as is evident from the select list bearing No.DFSS/PHD/Adm/CCAS/KU/15 dated 23.12.2015. The name of the petitioner appears at serial No.4 with total marks 66 out of 100.

6) Consequent upon his selection, the petitioner, it is claimed, reported at CCAS for pursuing his Ph.D. Programme. The Dean, Faculty of Social Sciences, taking note of the request of the petitioner that he would like to pursue his Ph.D. Programme on part time basis, submitted the request of the petitioner to the Dean Research, who, after finding that the petitioner was working as Junior Professional Assistant on contract basis for last three years and was not a permanent employee of the University having four years substantive service, forwarded the case of the petitioner to the Vice Chancellor of the University. The Vice Chancellor in turn recommended for placing the matter before the Board of Research Studies. The Board of Research Studies, however, declined to grant permission to the petitioner to pursue his Ph.D. Programme on part time basis without putting in residency period. The decision of the Board of Research Studies in CCAS is contained in Agenda Item No.3 of the minutes of meeting which was held on 07.09.2017 in the Committee Room of the Administrative Block, University Campus, Srinagar. It is this decision of the Board of Research Studies which is called in question in this petition.

7) The petitioner seeks to challenge the impugned decision of the Board of Research Studies on the following grounds:

(I) That the impugned decision of the Board of Research Studies is arbitrary and does not spell out any reasons to decline admission to the petitioner to Three Years? Integrated Programme in Ph. D. on part time basis and, therefore, the same is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India;

(II) That the petitioner, as per the relevant Clauses of the Statute, particularly Clause 7.2, is fully eligible and, therefore, cannot be denied his right to pursue the Ph.D. Programme in question on part time basis. It is also claimed that Clause 7.2 of the statute, which provides for substantive service in the University, Central or State Government, is directory in nature and looking to the object sought to be achieved by the Statute, particularly Clause 7.2, a person serving in the University on contractual basis cannot be treated differently from the one working on substantive basis and, therefore, Clause 7.2 calls for a purposive interpretation to read into it an employe