Back
2013 Supreme(Mad) 1661
MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
D. HARIPARANTHAMAN, J.
Mrs. Sophia & Others
Versus
The University Grant-commission (UGC), Rep. by its Secretary & Others
W.P. (MD). Nos. 2616, 2842, 3135 to 3140, 3234, 3602, 3770, 4590 to 4592, 4805, 5009, 5164, 5471, 3935, 3946, 4042, 6120, 6067, 6266 & 6359 of 2013 & 12903, 12904, 14801, 16619, 16237 & 16757 of 2012
Decided On : 18-04-2013
For the Petitioners:M. Sathiyamoorthy, T. Lajapathi Roy, Eddy, Emboss, N. Dilip Kumar, K. Appadurai, P. Kannadasan, V. Rama Jagadeesan, R. Venkatesan, R. Subramaniam, Louis, P. Subbaraj, C. Rajakumar, Ms. D. Geetha, S.C. Herold Singh, D. Sadiq Raja, L. Sudhakaran, R. Lakshmanan, Shaji Chellan, Advocates.
For the Respondents:R1, B. Vijayakarthikeyan, R2, B. Muruganandam, Additional Government Pleader, Ms. S. Barathy, Government Advocate.
Introduction of additional criteria just before the announcement of the result cannot be justified and is not supportable in law.
Headnote:
NET/SET - Assistant Professors - The court declared that the petitioners who obtained the minimum prescribed marks in the notification for papers I, II, and III have qualified in NET/SET, and directed the UGC/Bharathiar University to issue appropriate certificates.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners did not secure a pass in NET/SET due to additional criteria fixed before the publication of results, and approached the court seeking a direction to declare them as successful in the examinations.
Finding of the Court:
The court allowed the writ petitions, following the order of the Kerala High Court, and declared that the petitioners have qualified in NET/SET based on the minimum prescribed marks in the notification for papers I, II, and III.
Issues: Validity of additional criteria for passing NET/SET and the petitioners' eligibility for qualification in the examinations.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the introduction of higher aggregate marks just before the announcement of the result cannot be justified and is not supportable in law.
Final Decision: The court allowed the writ petitions and directed the UGC/Bharathiar University to issue appropriate certificates to the petitioners within 30 days.
1. As per Clause 3.3.1 of the University Grants Commission (Minimum Qualification for appointment of Teachers and Academic Staff in Universities and Colleges and other measures for the maintenance of standards in Higher Education) Regulations, 2010, the minimum eligibility conditions for recruitment and appointment of Assistant Professors in Universities/Colleges/Institutions to qualify in NET/SLET/SET.
2. As per the afore-said regulations, the UGC issued notification dated 04.06.2012 for National Eligibility Test (in short NET) examinations. NET examinations contained three papers the maximum marks in respect of Paper I and II is 100. The maximum marks in respect of Paper III is 150. The minimum marks for the General Category, OBC Category, PWD/SC/ST category for Paper I, II and III are as follows:-
3. A similar notification was issued by Bharathiar University on 10.08.2012 for conducting State Eligibility Test (in short SET). The result of the SET was published on 09.02.2013, by the Bharathiar University.
4. NET results was also published by the UGC in the website in September 2012.
5. Before publication of results in NET/SET, an additional criteria was fixed for passing NET/SET i.e., besides getting the minimum percentage of marks, as prescribed in the notification, the General Category, OBC Category and PWS/SC/ST Category shall get an average of marks in all the three papers with at least 65%, 60% and 55% respectively, to qualify in the examinations.
6. In view of the afore-said additional criteria, the petitioners did not secure pass in NET/SET. Hence, they have approached this Court seeking for a direction to declare them as successful in NET/SET examinations.
7. A similar batch of writ petitions were filed in Kerala High Court as well as before the Principal Bench of this Court. following the order passed in the Kerala High Court, the Principal Bench of this Court allowed a batch of writ petitions on 31.01.2013 in W.P.Nos.33798 of 2012 etc., batch.
8. Paragraph 2 of the afore-said order is extracted hereunder:-
“It is not in dispute that the Kerala High Court by an order dated 17.12.2012, has allowed similar writ petitions in W.P.(C) No.22187 of 2012 etc. batch. The High Court of Kerala has passed the following order:-
“53. Therefore, the fixing of the higher aggregate marks as 65%, 60% and 55% for three categories, that too just before the announcement of the result, cannot be justified as the same is not supportable in law in the light of the principles already discussed. What was absent in the regulation cannot be introduced at the fag end of the examination, just before the announcement of the result, whatever may be the justification for the same.
54. In the light of the above, the writ petitions are allowed. The proceedings fixing the category-wise qualifying criteria for Lectureship eligibility impugned in the writ petitions, is quashed. It is declared that all the petitioners who have obtained the separate minimum prescribed in the notification for papers I, II and III, have cleared the NET and appropriate follow up actions will be taken to issue certificates to them within one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. No costs.”
9. At this juncture, the learned counsel for the UGC has submitted that against the single Judge order of the Kerala High Court, a writ appeal was filed before the Division Bench and arguments were heard and orders were reserved by the Kerala High Court on 25.03.2013 and order is yet to be pronounced. He has therefore, prayed for adjournment, till the order is pronounced by the Division Bench of the Kerala High Court.
10. I am not inclined to wait for the outcome of the Kerala High Court Division Bench Order, particularly when the Principal Bench of this Court has allowed batch of writ petitions of similar nature. Hence, following the order of the Kerala High Court in W.P. (C).No.22187 of 2012 etc, batch, dated 17.12.2012, these writ petitions are a
