High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
Dr. Rajnish Kumar Pandey v. C.S.J.M. University And Others - WRIT - C No. - 51308 of 2006  RD-AH 15732 (19 September 2007)
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Court No. 33
Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 51308 of 2006
Dr. Rajnish Kumar Pandey
Chhatrapati Shahu Ji Maharaj University
Kunpur & others
Hon'ble V.K. Shukla,J
Petitioner has filed present writ petition for quashing the order dated 30.01.2006 filed as Annexure No. 5 to this writ petition by means of which claim of the petitioner for according degree of D.Litt in Commerce has been rejected.
Petitioner applied for registration of Dlitt. Degree and his application was considered by the Research Degree Committee (RDC) and petitioner was registered on 31.01.2001 on the topic "An Analytical Study of Economic Implications of Rising NPA in the Banking Sector." Petitioner has contended that for being registered he started research work, on the topic with full ability, intelligently and diligently and after completing the research work, the petitioner submitted the thesis to the University for its evaluation on 23.08.2002. Petitioner has contended that under the Ordinance of the University said thesis was to be sent to the examiners for its evaluation. Petitioner has contended that on 13.01.2004 he has received a letter dated 09.01.2004 asking the petitioner to revise the thesis on certain points as mentioned in the said letter. Petitioner has contended that he acquired knowledge that three out of four examiners have approved petitioner's thesis. Petitioner has further contended that he has submitted revised letter thesis and sent various reminders and ultimately he was called for viva-voce test on 03.10.2005 and thereafter petitioner has been sent letter informing him that his research work has been rejected. At this juncture present writ petition has been filed.
Counter affidavit has been filed and therein it has been contended that after receiving the thesis of D.Lit. of the petitioner, same was sent for evaluation to five highly reputed experts and one of the Examiner has rejected the thesis of the petitioner whereas other one has recommended for revision of the same, in this background petitioner was accordingly informed by letter for revision of his thesis. It has further been contended that after revision of thesis the same was sent to the Examiner for reevaluation and after re-evaluation of the same, same has again rejected. Thereafter as per relevant Ordinance, three examiners were invited for conducting the viva voce test of the petitioner and after viva voce test both the examiners unanimously have not found the petitioner suitable for award of D.Lit. Degree and accordingly made recommendation for rejection of the same.
Rejoinder affidavit has been filed and it has been contended therein that petitioner has been metted with arbitrary treatment and as per Ordinance No. 21 of the University after acceptance of thesis by majority of examiners, the respondents have no authority to call for revision of the thesis.
After pleadings mentioned above have been exchanged present writ petition has been taken up for final hearing and disposal with the consent of parties.
Sri Balram Gupta, Advocate, contended with vehemence that once thesis in question had been accepted by majority of the examiners then there was no occasion for revision of the thesis and petitioner was entitled for D.Litt. Degree, as calling for viva voce test is clearly indicative of the fact that majority members had approved as such action taken is unjustifiable.
Sri Neeraj Tiwari, Advocate on the other hand contended that unnecessarily petitioner is trying to confuse the issue and as per Ordinance of the University the claim of the petitioner has been considered and same has been non-suited.
In order to appreciate the arguments advanced, relevant Ordinance No. 21 of the University which covers the field is being quoted below:
"21. On its receipt, the thesis shall be sent to five persons selected by the Vice-Chancellor out of the pannel as provided under ordinance 19 if a majority of the original examiners approve the thesis, it shall be accepted. But if a majority of the examiners disapproved the thesis, it shall be rejected.
In case the majority of original examiners approve the thesis or in the event of divergence of opinion between the original four, the fifth examiner approves it, the candidate shall be called upon to appear for a Viva-Voce test before a Board comprising of any examiners who approved his Thesis.
If Majority of Viva-Voce examiners are satisfied, the case shall be placed before the Examiners Committee. If the Exam. Committee considering the reports of the examiners, considers the candidate worthy of the D.Litt. Or D.Sc. Degree (as the case may be) they shall recommended to the Ex. Council that the degree be awarded.
It the examiners are of opinion that the candidate's work does not come upto the standard of the D.Litt or D.Sc. Degree and recommended the award of the Ph. D. Degree instead, the Executive Council on the recommendation of the Examination Committee may permit the candidate to resubmit his thesis not earlier than six months and not later than one year or under very special circumstances not later than the date to be fixed by Executive Council in such cases. In case a candidate is allowed to resubmit his thesis he shall have to pay a fresh fee of Rs. 600/ at the time of resubmitting his thesis."
A bare perusal of the provision quoted above would go to show that on its receipt, the thesis shall be sent to five persons selected by the Vice-Chancellor out of the panel if a majority of the original examiners approve the thesis, it shall be accepted. But if a majority of the examiners disapproved the thesis, it shall be rejected. Further it has been provided that in case the majority of original examiners approve the thesis or in the event of divergence of opinion between the original four, the fifth examiner approves it, the candidate shall be called upon to appear for a Viva-Voce test before a Board comprising of any examiners who approved his Thesis. Further it has been provided that if Majority of Viva-Voce examiners are satisfied, the case shall be placed before the Examiners Committee. If the Exam. Committee considering the reports of the examiners, considers the candidate worthy of the D.Litt. Or D.Sc. Degree (as the case may be) they shall recommended to the Ex. Council that the degree be awarded.
Here in the present case out of four examiners, one examiner has rejected the thesis, whereas one had recommended for revision as there was divergence of the opinion, petitioner was called for Viva Voce Test. Once petitioner has been called for Viva Voce Test, then majority of Viva-voce examiners were to be satisfied but here Viva Voce Test examiners were not satisfied in this background petitioners claim has been rejected strictly in consonance with the relevant ordinance. Majority of original examiners had never approved the thesis of petitioner.
Consequently, writ petition is dismissed.
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.