1990 Supreme(P&H) 816
PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
J.V.Gupta and R.S.Mongia JJ.
Punjab University, Chandigarh
Versus
Ashwinder Kaur
Letter Patent Appeal No. 1217 of 1988,
Decided On : NOVEMBER 16, 1990
The University could lay down higher qualifications for admission than the minimum prescribed in the University Calendar, but giving weightage of marks to dependent sons/daughters of Punjab University employees was arbitrary and discriminatory.
Headnote:
ADMISSION CRITERIA - PUNJAB UNIVERSITY - M.LIB. COURSE - HIGHER QUALIFICATIONS - WEIGHTEGE TO EMPLOYEES' DEPENDENTS - NORMALISATION OF MARKS - VALIDITY - PUNJAB UNIVERSITY CALENDAR, VOL. II, 1984, REG. 3.1.
Fact of the Case:
Writ petitioners challenged the admission criteria for the Master of Library and Information Science (M. Lib.) course at Punjab University for the session 1988-89. The criteria included higher qualifications than the minimum prescribed, weightage of 5% marks to dependent sons/daughters of Punjab University employees, and a formula for normalisation of marks.
Finding of the Court:
1. The University could lay down higher qualifications for admission than the minimum prescribed in the University Calendar. 2. Giving weightage of 5% marks to dependent sons/daughters of Punjab University employees was arbitrary and discriminatory. 3. Normalisation of marks should be done for both the minimum qualifying examination and the higher qualification.
Issues: 1. Whether the University could lay down higher qualifications for admission than the minimum prescribed in the University Calendar? 2. Whether giving weightage of 5% marks to dependent sons/daughters of Punjab University employees was valid? 3. Whether normalisation of marks should be done only for the minimum qualifying examination or also for the higher qualification?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The minimum qualifications prescribed in the University Calendar were the barest requirement for eligibility and did not debar the University from seeking persons with higher qualifications. 2. Giving weightage of marks to dependent sons/daughters of Punjab University employees had no nexus with the object to be achieved and was arbitrary and discriminatory. 3. Normalisation of marks was necessary to compare candidates with different maximum marks in their qualifying examinations and higher qualifications.
Final Decision: The appeals were partly allowed. The University could lay down higher qualifications for admission, but the weightage of marks to employees' dependents was quashed. Normalisation of marks was to be done for both the minimum qualifying examination and the higher qualification.
R.S. MONGIA, J. :-
1. By this judgment we propose to decide two Letters Patent Appeals Nos. 1217 and 1218 of 1988, filed by the Punjab University, inasmuch as learned single Judge, against whose judgment these two Letters Patent Appeals have arisen, had decided two Writ Petitions Nos. 8065 of 1988 and 8362 of 1988 by the same judgment.
2. Ashwinder Kaur and Ritu Chandha, writ-petitioners, in the above-said two writ petitions, had challenged the criteria for admission to the course of Master of Library and Information Science (in short M. Lib.) in the Punjab University for the session 1988-89.The challenge to the criteria for admission to the said course was : (i) The department had introduced qualifications higher than the minimum prescribed in the University Calendar for admission to the course, thereby excluded the petitioners to seek admission; (ii) That giving weightage of 5% marks to the dependent sons/ daughters of the Punjab University employees in service or retired, was arbitrary and discriminatory; and (iii) That the formula laid down by the authorities for normalisation of marks obtained in the minimum qualifying examination as well as in the higher qualification was also arbitrary. The learned single Judge accepted all the above three points raised on behalf of the writ petitioners and allowed the writ petitions. Aggrieved by the said judgment, the University has come up in appeals.
3. It may be mentioned here that when the writ petitions were admitted, the University was directed to admit the petitioners provisionally to the M.Lib. Course. The writ petitioners have completed their course and have passed the said examination. At the outset we put it to the University counsel that the decision in the appeals would be just academic, inasmuch as the writ petitioners have already passed the M. Lib. course. Mr. N.K. Sodhi, Senior Advocate, learned counsel for the appellant-university, submitted that the University was keen to get a decision in the matter for their future guidance as to whether they could lay down the criteria which has been struck down by the learned single Judge. He also undertook that even in case these Letters Patent Appeals were to be allowed the benefit of the judgment of the learned single Judge to the petitioners would not be withdrawn and their result in the M. Lib. examination would stand. Accordingly, we proceeded to hear the counsel for the respective parties.
4. A brief resume of the facts and the relevant provisions of the University Calendar regarding the admission to M. Lib, would be necessary at this stage.
5. Writ petitioner Ashwinder Kaur, who is a Graduate from the Punjab University, passed her Bachelor of Library Science Examination in April, 1988, obtaining 66% marks and securing second position in the University. She also passed M.A. in Economics. She applied for admission to the M. Lib. Course for the year 1988-89, but was unsuccessful in getting admission. Somewhat similar are the facts of the other writ petitioner Miss Ritu Chadha. 6 Regulation 3.1 of the Punjab University Calendar, Volume II, 1984 (Page 172) prescribes the minimum qualification for admission to the M.Lib. Course. The same is reproduced below :
"3.1. The minimum qualifications for admission to the course for the degree of Master of Library Science shall be (i) the Punjab University Post-graduate diploma in Library Science (one year course) or the Punjab University Bachelor of Library Science degree, with at least 50 per cent marks in the aggregate of either of them; or (ii) a diploma or degree of another University recognised by the Syndicate as equivalent to (i) with at least 50 per cent marks in the aggregate"
. As against the above, the notice of admission, which has been attached as Annexure R-1 to the written statement, laid down the criteria to admission for M. Lib. and the same is reproduced below :
"Criteria for Admission: (i) Candidates will be admitted on the basis of their merit in post-Gradua