Swati Tirkey & ORS v. Jawaharlal Nehru University

$~32 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 11306/2017 & C.M. Nos.46165-66/2017 SWATI TIRKEY & ORS ..... Petitioners Through Mr. Abhik Chimni and Mr. Govind Manmohan, Advs.

versus JAWAHARLAL NEHRU UNIVERSITY ..... Respondent Through Ms.Monika Arora, Mr. Harsh Ahuja, Mr.Kushal Kumar, Mr.

Vibhu Tripathi, Advs with Mr. Pramod Kumar, Registrar.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR

O R D E R

% 18.12.2017 There are three petitioners before this Court. They are aggrieved by the amendments in the brochure of the respondent University wherein the earlier program for study of the M. Phill/Ph. D course had envisaged that after the award of the degree of Master of Philosophy, students meeting the prescribed criteria shall be eligible for registration to their Ph. D program. Submission is that this Brochure was issued in the month of September, 2017 pursuant to which the petitioners had applied for the aforenoted course and have now been issued their admit cards; entrance exam is scheduled for 27.12.2017. The grievance is that the admit cards issued to them show that the candidate who had applied for M. Phill/Ph. D for the academic year 2018-2019 will be considered for M. Phill only and M.

Phill will now be a terminal degree program as per the decision in the 144th Council meeting so held on 01.12.2017. Submission being that on 01.12.2017, the Academic Council in its meeting has changed the essential terms of the Admission Brochure which is a binding document upon the respondent; this could not have been done once the admission process has been initiated.

On advance notice, learned counsel for the respondent has put in appearance. Learned counsel for the respondents under instructions from the Registrar of the University (present in Court) submits that the University is in the process of de-linking the M. Phill and Ph. D programs and she has instructions to state that a student who has completed M.A. may straightaway join the Ph. D program; he may omit the M. Phill course; this would work in favour of the candidate as he would save the time spent in a M. Phill program after his M.A and can straightaway do a Ph. D program. The conditions contained in the admit card that the M. Phill program will now be treated as a terminal degree program is not disputed.

At this stage, learned counsel for the respondent under instructions from the Registrar of the University submits that admission program qua the present petitioners shall not be varied and the admission brochure/prospectus pursuant to which the petitioners had applied for admission and had been issued the admit cards will remain the same.

In view of this submission of the learned counsel for the respondent, petitioner does not press the petition any further.

Learned counsel for the respondent points out that for the next academic session, the M Phill/Ph. D program will be de-linked. This submission of the respondent not being a part of the record, this Court need not delve into this aspect.

Petition disposed of in the above terms.

INDERMEET KAUR, J DECEMBER 18, 2017