Country In Dire Need Of Research Work: Allahabad HC Directs University To Consider Student's Application Seeking 1 Year Extension To Complete PhD Course

The Court was hearing a Writ Petition challenging the decision of the Departmental Research Committee at Dr. Shakuntala Misra National Rehabilitation University, Lucknow, which cancelled the Petitioner's admission to the Ph.D. program in Sociology. The Petitioner also contested the subsequent orders from the Research Degree Committee and the Registrar, respectively, which communicated the cancellation of his PhD admission.

The bench of Justice Alok Mathur observed, “the country is making its best efforts to grow from a developing nation to a developed one. Repeatedly, it is said that to become a developed nation huge research work is required to be conducted within the Country. Now, when the students are pursuing their research work and are at the verge of completion it is highly improper to restrain them from completing their research on legal technicalities. The country is in dire need of research work. Petitioner has put more than five years in his Ph.D. course and is on the verge of submitting the same. Now denial of benefit of said research work to the nation in itself would be a huge loss.”

Advocate Krishna Lal Yadav appeared for the Appellant and Senior Advocate Atul Kumar Dwivedi appeared for the Respondent.

Brief Facts-

The Petitioner applied for a Ph.D. in Sociology at Dr. Shakuntala Misra National Rehabilitation University, Lucknow. He was admitted in 2016 after he completed all admission formalities. He remained in the first year of his PhD program from 2016 to 2021. In 2021 he was not allowed to continue his Ph.D. The petitioner filed a Writ Petition which was disposed of with a directive for the Vice-Chancellor to address the Petitioner's grievance. The Vice-Chancellor communicated that the Petitioner was admitted without proper selection and his failure to submit an affidavit led to the cancellation of his admission, which was approved by the Research Degree Committee.

The Court mentioned the decision in Rajendra Prasad Mathur's case and quoted, “But it must be noted that the blame for their wrongful admission must lie more upon the engineering colleges which granted admission than upon the appellants….We do not see why the appellants should suffer for the sins of the managements of these engineering colleges.”

The Court further mentioned the Abha George’s Case and quoted, “while granting the admission if the academic body has acted inattentively and mechanically, then they cannot be allowed to take the plea that the admission was never valid and that the petitioners were ineligible from the very inception and knowing the ineligibility they applied for admission. The respondents cannot be allowed to cancel the admission at their own convenience at any time of the year without considering the fact that if they cancel the admission after the session has started then the entire year of the petitioners will be spoiled…”

The Court said that once the University has granted admission and permitted the petitioner to continue for five long years and his PhD course is on the verge of completion, it is now not open for the University to restrain the petitioner from completing his course.

As per the Court even presuming some irregularity did occur at the time of admission in Ph.D. course, the same can not be made the basis for denying petitioner from completing his course.

The Court said that the respondent University could not show from the record that the petitioner has in any manner misrepresented or played fraud or otherwise was maliciously involved in the admission process.

Accordingly, the Court said that the University cannot restrain the petitioner from completing his Ph.D. course and is bound to consider his application.

Finally, the Court allowed the Writ Petition and quashed the orders. The Court also issued a mandamus to the University to consider the application of Petitioner for an extension of one year after five years of the Ph.D. course.

Cause Title: Mithilesh Kumar Chaudhary v. State Of U.P. Thru. Addil. Chief Secy. Empowerment Of Persons With Disabilities, Lko. And Others (Neutral Citation: 2024:AHC-LKO:52688)

Appearance:

Appellant: Adv. Krishna Lal Yadav and Adv. Aparna Sinha

Respondent: C.S.C. And Sr. Adv. Atul Kumar Dwivedi

Click here to read/download Judgment