Richika vs University of Jammu and Others

S.K. Gupta, J.—Petitioner having completed Bachelor's Degree in Music after securing 65.48% marks applied for admission in B.Lib. Sc.

Course in the University of Jammu for the Session 2004-05 under the CDP category. On the basis of her merit, the petitioner became entitled for

admission when the candidate figuring above failed to join the Course. The petitioner further stated to have approached the respondents-University

repeatedly for grant of admission being next candidate in merit and entitled to be considered against the vacant seat in CDP category, but without

any response. The respondents-University did not publish the next list nor the reason of delay was conveyed to her. It was only on 7.8.2004, when

she again approached respondent No. 2, the petitioner was verbally informed that she cannot be considered for admission to B.Lib. Sc. Course on

the ground that her Degree is not considered as eligible for the purpose of admission to B.Lib. Sc. Course. The respondents-University, therefore,

ignored the claim of the petitioner on the basis of her merit for admission to B.Lib. Sc. Course and, instead without any justification and in arbitrary

manner, published a list on 7.8.2004 showing the name of Anil Kumar, who obtained only 64.36% marks, to have been selected for seeking

admission to the said Course. However, when Anil Kumar did not join, respondent No. 4 was selected under CDP category having secured only

60.78% marks, as against the petitioner, who has secured 65.5% marks and has a better merit, in an illegal and arbitrary manner, which

occasioned the petitioner to approach the court seeking quashment of the selection of respondent No. 4 against the CDP category seat, by issuing

a writ of certiorari and further commanding the respondents-University to grant admission to petitioner in B.Lib. Sc. Course for the Session 2004-

05 being higher in merit to respondent No. 4 under CDP category and treating her Bachelor's Degree in Music & Fine Arts as eligible and

qualifying as per Clause 6 and Sub-clause (D)(ii) of the Brochure issued by respondent No. 1, in exercise of its powers vested under Article 226

of the Constitution of India read with Section 103 of the Constitution of Jammu & Kashmir.

The stand of respondents-1 to 3 in their demurrer, filed in the writ petition in admitting the higher merit of the petitioner under CDP category for

B.Lib. Sc. Course for Session 2004-05, is that the Admission Committee, upon scrutiny of the form of the petitioner at the time of considering her

name for admission, forwarded her case to the Dean Academic Affairs for clarification as regards her eligibility under the statutory rules. The

Admission Committee, however, rejected the case of the petitioner for admission based on the decision dated 19.12.2002 taken by Statutory

Committee of Academic Council, wherein it was resolved that the Degree of Music and Fine Arts was recognized for purposes of admission to

courses mentioned in the decision other than B.Lib. Sc. Course. It was further stated that in view of the aforesaid decision of the Statutory

Committee of the Academic Council, the seat was given to the next candidate, i.e., respondent No. 4 as per merit.

Whereas, private respondent No. 4 in her counter submitted that the petitioner, being ineligible, was not approved by the Screening Committee

and on account of which, the University selected Anil Kumar in CDP category. When the candidate, Anil Kumar, earlier selected and figuring

above in merit to the petitioner did not join, respondent No. 4, however, came to be selected. It is further stated that there is a vacant seat in ST

Category still available in B.Lib. Sc. Course, which is to be converted by the University in another category as in case of MBA discipline. The

respondent also submitted that she has been selected by the University on the basis of her eligibility and merit to pursue the Course in B.Lib.

Science, and now it cannot be challenged by an unsuccessful candidate (petitioner), whose case for admission has been rejected by the

Committee. That the respondent cannot be made to suffer, if any mistake has been committed by the University in declining admission to the

petitioner, after the Screening Committee found her ineligible for admission in B.Lib. Sc. Course, being graduate in Music.

I have heard the learned Counsel appearing for the respective parties in extenso. Record has also been perused, besides the relevant provisions

of the Brochure and the Statutes of the University governing the field.

The petitioner is aggrieved of the decision taken by the Standing Committee of the Academic Council, wherein it was resolved that, among

others, the Degree of Music and Fine Arts was recognized for purposes of admission to the course mentioned in the decision other than B.Lib. Sc.

Course, and on the basis of which the respondents rejected the case of the petitioner for admission to B.Lib. Sc. Course and the seat was given to

next candidate under CDP category for the said Course having lower merit than the petitioner. According to the petitioner, the action of the

respondents is based upon bias and in violation of the fundamental rights. This right is being taken away by incorporating the ineligibility condition

under the resolution of the Standing Statutory Committee of Academic Council, which is in violation to the University Statutes and the Information

Brochure issued by the University for the Session 2004-05 laying down the eligibility criteria in Clause 6(D)(ii) of the Information Brochure to be

fulfilled by the candidate applying for admission to B.Lib. Sc. Course. For facility of reference, the relevant clause of the Information Brochure

issued by the University is reproduced as under:

ELIGIBILITY QUALIFICATION

A candidate to be eligible for admission to the Master Degree (other than M.Phil), Bachelor Degree (LL.B., B.Lib. Sc. & B.P.Ed) and Diploma

programmes in the University, must have passed the qualifying Bachelor degree examination of 10+2+3 pattern (Honours or General) in Arts,

Science, Commerce and Business Administration or an examination qualifying for a professional degree of not less than 3 years duration or any

other examination recognized as equivalent thereto from a statutory university/institution with at least 40% of the aggregate marks (36% for the

Scheduled Caste/Tribe candidates).

BACHELOR DEGREE PROGRAMME IN LAW & LIBRARY SCIENCE.

For admission to Bachelor Degree Courses of study in the University a candidate to be eligible, must have passed the qualifying degree

examination with the requisite percentage of aggregate marks (specified at No. 6), except where provided otherwise in the following:

(i) x x x x x x x x x x

(ii) LIBRARY SCIENCE:

For admission to B.Lib. Sc. Degree Course a candidate to be eligible, must have passed the qualifying degree examination in any disciplinary

stream with the requisite percentage of aggregate marks (specified at No. 6).

It is not in dispute that prior to the resolution of the Standing Committee of the Academic Council dated 19.12.2002, Degree of Music and Fine

Acts was recognized for the purpose of admission to B.Lib. Sc. Course. Even the University Statutes in the Information Brochure, which came to

be issued for the Session 2004-05 for admission to B.Lib. Sc. Course, did not make mention that the candidates with Degree in Music and Fine

Arts would not be eligible for admission to B.Lib. Sc. Course. Even the Information Brochure issued by the University no where indicates that the

Degree of Music and Fine Arts is not recognized for purpose of admission to Higher Courses, i.e., LL.B., PGDBM, PGDOM & P.B.Ed., of the

University other than B.Lib. Course. It, therefore, clearly reveals that the action of the respondents, in creating embargo with the petitioner in

declaring her ineligible based on the resolution of the Committee, is in contravention to the University Statutes and also the Information Brochure,

and not recognizing the Degree of Music and Fine Arts is also in violation of the Article 13 of the Constitution of India, which renders every action

in derogation of fundamental rights as null and void and inoperative. It does not sound to common sense that when the Degree in Music and Fine

Arts is recognized by the University in other courses in Higher education, how it could be that the same is not recognized for admission to B.Lib.

Sc. Course, and the action of the respondents is, therefore, illegal, unjustifiable and renders unconstitutional being violative of fundamental rights of

the petitioner enshrined in Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. The respondents, therefore, are estopped from creating any impediments

and ineligibility criteria on the rights of the petitioner seeking admission to B.Lib. Sc. Course based on her Degree in Music and Fine Arts. It is in

this perspective that resolution of the Standing Committee of the Academic Council dated 19.12.2002 is to be viewed.

It takes me to the logical conclusion, based on the University Statutes and the Information Brochure issued by the University for the Session

2004-05, that restriction contained in the resolution of the Standing Committee of the Academic Council, debarring the petitioner from taking

admission in B.Lib. Sc. Course based on her degree in Music and Fine Arts, cannot be justified and is, thus, unsustainable both on the touch-stone

of law and probity. Further, the action of the respondents, based on such resolution in giving admission to respondent No. 4 with lower merit in

CDP category, is arbitrary and colorable exercise of power, hence violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. This restriction, being not

sustainable in law, deserves to be removed.

The contention raised by Mrs. Surinder Kour, learned Counsel appearing for respondent No. 4, that though respondent No. 4 is lower in merit

but has been given admission by the University in the said category, without there being any fault on her part, the writ petition is not maintainable

when she is otherwise eligible for admission, is without substance, in view of the admitted position that the petitioner is higher in merit and the

restriction contained in resolution of the Academic Council is contrary to the University Statutes and the Information Brochure was neither

justifiable nor tenable in law.

Mr. D.S. Thakur, learned Counsel appearing for rospondents-1, 2 and 3, however, submitted that vide Notification No.

F.Acd/V/122/04/4305-4364 dated 31.08.2004, it was declared that the Bachelor Degree in Music & Fine Arts of this University is treated as

equivalent to BA/B.Sc./B.Com. Degree for purpose of admission to B.Lib. Sc. Course of this University. This shows that wisdom has drawn on

the respondents sooner or later in realizing their mistake but after the petitioner has been deprived of her valuable right to acquire higher and better

education in ignoring higher merit and rejected her application for admission to B.Lib. Sc. Course.

In the facts and circumstances, I allow the writ petition and quash the selection of respondent No. 4 in CDP category, lower in merit than the

petitioner, being arbitrary, illegal and in contravention of the University Statutes and Brochure issued by the University for the Session 2004-05.

The respondents are further commanded to grant admission to the petitioner in B.Lib. Sc. Course in Session 2004-05 as per her merit under CDP

category in treating her Bachelor's Degree in Music and Fine Arts, as eligible and qualifying, as per Clause 6 Sub-clause (D)(ii) of the Brochure

issued by respondent No. 1, against the seat available on vacation.

The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of alongwith connected CMPs. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that on account of

typographically error, name of the petitioner has been inscribed as ""Richika"" instead of ""Ruchika"" and prayed that he may be allowed to make the

table amendment. Acceding to the prayer, the learned Counsel for the petitioner is permitted to make correction in the cause title before the

Registrar Judicial by table amendment.