Maira Jamal v. Indira Gandhi Delhi Technical Univeristy For Women & ORS.

$~16 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(C) 2657/2014 MAIRA JAMAL ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr. M.Atyab Siddiqui, Adv.

versus INDIRA GANDHI DELHI TECHNICAL UNIVERISTY FOR WOMEN & ORS.

..... Respondents Through:

Ms.Latika Chaudhary, Adv. for Ms.

Avnish Ahlawat, Adv. for R-1 to R-4.

Ms. Sonam Gupta and Mr. Devansh Arya, Advocates for R-5.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J. MEHTA

O R D E R

% 30.11.2016 1.

Counsel for the petitioner has argued the case. During the course of arguments an issue arose with respect to whether petitioner does or does not fulfil the eligibility criteria of having graduation and postgraduation degrees in Electronics and Communication Engineering and whether she has eight years teaching experience in this relevant discipline. 2.

Petitioner has filed her post-graduation degree in Electrical Control and Engineering and not Electronics and Communication Engineering.

No graduation degree is filed with respect to the petitioner having a degree in Electronics and Communication Engineering. Petitioner

though has not challenged in the writ petition but in the rejoinder-affidavit has challenged the constitution of the selection committee, of course without giving any substantive cause of action as to how the screening committee is illegally constituted.

3.

Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed to be withdrawn as prayed with liberty being granted to the petitioner to file a fresh writ petition provided in the fresh writ petition the petitioner makes the following averments duly substantiated:- (i) Petitioner has a graduation degree in Electronics and Communication Engineering or otherwise makes an averment that Universities do not grant any graduation degree in Electronics and Communication Engineering.

(ii) Petitioner has a post graduation degree in Electronics and Communication Engineering or that how a post graduation degree in Electrical Controls and Engineering which the petitioner has is by which relevant law or rule equivalent to Electronics and Communication Engineering.

(iii) Petitioner will also plead and substantiate as to how petitioner has eight years experience as is required by the relevant advertisement.

(iv) Petitioner will also make all other averments necessary in law if and how the constitution of the screening committee is illegal and by giving reference to specific rules, circulars or guidelines. 4.

In view of the above, interim order passed by this Court is vacated and the writ petition is allowed to be withdrawn with liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh writ petition subject to the aforesaid observations and pleadings to be made.

VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J NOVEMBER 30, 2016 ib