Dr. Padam Chand Meena @APPELLANT@Hash University Grants Commission

The petitioner has preferred this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, claiming the following reliefs:

“A. By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the advertisement dated 12.01.2015 (Annex.1) be declared illegal so far as it prescribed illegal

eligibility criteria for reserve category candidates for the purpose of according appointment on the post of College Lecturers.

B. By an appropriate writ, order or direction, theprovision of relaxation of 5% marks at UG Level, PG Level and for assessment of Good Academic

Record to the candidates belonging to SC/ST/OBC/PH and Widow category be given effect to as mandated by the UGC Regulations of 2010.

C. By an appropriate writ, order or direction, the respondents may kindly be directed to extend the benefits of relaxation of 5% marks at UG Level,

PG Level and for assessment of good academic to the petitioner as he being a candidate belonging to Scheduled Tribe Category.

D. Any other appropriate writ, order or directionwhich this Hon’ble Court considers just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case

may kindly be passed in favour of the petitioner.

E. Costs throughout may kindly be awarded infavour of the petitioner.

Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the controversy is decided by this Court in the matter of Lalit Kumar Vs. UGC & Ors. (S.B. Civil

Writ Petition No.7545/2017) on 28.11.2017. The relevant portion of the order reads as under:

“14. This Court has seen that Rules of 1986 have given the complete qualification to be laid down as per the University Grant Commission and

admittedly the University Grant Commission has vide regulations dated 30th June, 2010 prescribed for recruitment and qualification in which as per the

Regulation 3.3.0 the good academic record of 55 % has been made mandatory for the said post.

The bare reading of Regulation 3.4.1 also makesit clear that in the UGC notification, 5% relaxation is provide for the good academic record for the

graduates and the post graduates level and strangely the State has abided some portion of the notification of the Regulation whereas other portion of

the notification has been ignored. Admittedly the State utilizing the same Regulation has provided 5% relaxation at post graduates level but ignoring the

same notification has denied relaxation at graduate level with no possible reasons for making such discrimination.

This Court has seen that this notification of2010 was absolutely binding if read in consonance with the rules of 1986 upon the State of Rajasthan

and the same is further fortified by the cover note of the NCTE notification particularly condition No.1.2 and condition No. 2 which has been

reproduced above which made the condition binding upon any college affiliated with the UGC.

This Court has seen the precedent law cited inwhich the overall concept of good academic record has been upheld by this Court but at the same

time it was held that the good academic record was to be decided by the expert. This Court upheld the expert’s opinion of stipulation of the

minimum qualifications for recruitment prescribed. It is no doubt that the University Grants Commission has best experts in the country who have

brought together the recruitment and qualification standards which were to be followed by every University and college.

It is not disputed that the all the Colleges ofState of Rajasthan are affiliated to UGC. The condition of the advertisement stating that any

amendment in the Rules from time to time shall govern the selection process makes it very clear that any changes in the Rules shall be governed even

when the selection process is going and thus the notification of 11th July, 2016 by which University Grants Commission has amended regulation 3.4.1

by extending the scope of relaxation of 5% to the other backward classes (Creamy layer) and the same shall be applicable in the present recruitment

process as per the respondent themselves.

Thus in view of the aforesaid observations thepresent writ petitions are allowed and the respondents are directed to provide relaxation of 5%

marks at UG Level, PG Level and for assessment of good academic record to the candidates belonging to SC/ST/OBC and PH Category as being

mandated by the UGC Regulations of 2010 and 2016. Since already an interim order was operating in favour of the petitioners and they have

participated in the selection process for the post and the selections have not culminated into finality therefore the present order shall be applicable for

all petitioners only as reinitiating the selection shall be prejudicial to all the participating candidates.â€​

In light of the aforequoted precedent law, the present writ petition is disposed of with direction to the respondents to consider the case of the

petitioner keeping in mind the aforementioned precedent law within a period of 30 days from today in the same terms.