|

Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak, Haryana

Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak, Haryana

Sugar Mill
Rohtak (District Rohtak)
Haryana, India

Pin Code : 124001

Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak is a University recognised by UGC.

Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak is also known as MDU.

Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak runs course(s) in Business Management stream(s).

Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak runs University Lesson Programs:
Certificate Programs:
Certificate Course in French
Certificate course in Spanish
Certificate course in Urdu

Under Graduate Programs:
B. P. Ed.
B.Tech (ECE,CSE,MECH, BIO-TECH)
Bachelor of Pharmacy
L. L. B. -3 Years(Evening)
L. L. B.( 3 Years)
L. L. B.( 5 Years)
BA
LLB
Post Graduate Programs:
M. A. (Defence Studies, Economics, Education, English, Fine Arts, Geography, Hindi, Mass Communication, Music, Political Science, Psychology, Public Administration, Sanskrit, Sociology, History, Business Economics, International Business), M.Com (Commerce), M. P. Ed. M. Pharm. (Drug Regulatory Affairs and Industrial Pharmacy), M. Sc. (Biochemistry, Biotechnology, Botany, Chemistry, Environmental Science, Genetics, Math with Computer Science, Mathematical Statistics, Mathematics, Medical Biotechnology, Zoology, Physics, Food Processing Technology), M.Ed., MBA, LLM, MCA, Master of Hotel Management, Master of Tourism Management

Diploma: Diploma in French, Post Graduate Diploma in Guidance & Counseling, Post Graduate Diploma in Translation (Hindi – English)

Research Programs:
M.Phil (Commerce, Economics, Education, English, Geography, Hindi, History, Mathematics, Political Science, Psychology, Public Administration, Sanskrit, Sociology, Statistics) courses.

Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak is situated in Rohtak of Haryana state (Province) in India.

Rohtak comes under Rohtak Tehsil, Rohtak District.

Fax # of Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak is 01262-294133, 294640, 292431.

Residence Phone No(s) of concerned peron(s) of Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak is (are) : Registrar : +91-1262-274710.

email ID(s) is  info@mduonline.org , vc@mdurohtak.net ,  rsdhankar_mduvc@hotmail.com

Website of Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak is www.mdurohtak.com, www.mduiip.net, www,mdurohtak.ac.in.

Additional Information about Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak is : University established under Haryana State Legislative Act XXV of 1975..

Vice Chancellor : Prof.Raj S. Dhankar, 01262-294327(O),+91-1262-274327 (O), 213119(R).

Registrar : Sh Shyamal Misra, 01262 294640(O)(R), registrar@mdurohtak.net.

Contact Details of Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak are : Telephone: +91-1262-294640, 296051-57, 292431, 211307, 211308
C.O.E: Telephone: +91-1262-274169

Department of Law, Rohtak
Department Of Pharmacy Science, Rohtak

 

More about Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak, Haryana


PAWAN KUMAR Vs MAHARISHI DAYANAND UNIVERSITY ROHTAK AND OTHERS
Tuesday, 28th April, 2009


RAMESH CHANDER AND OTHERS Versus MD UNIVERSITY AND ANOTHER Civil Writ Petition 3140 of 2010
Wednesday, 23rd February, 2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Civil Writ Petition 3140 of 2010

Date of decision: 23.02.2011

Ramesh Chander and others …Petitioners
Versus
M.D. University and another …Respondents

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH

Present:
Mr. Nilesh Bhardwaj, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. Anurag Goyal, Advocate for respondents No. 1 and 2.
Mr. S.S. Patter, DAG, Haryana, for the State.

RANJIT SINGH J.
The petitioners were initially appointed as Security-cum-
Chowkidar in pre-revised scale of Rs. 750-12-870-EB-14- 940+30 special pay on the contract basis but against a substantive post. The University allowed the benefit of increment to the petitioners. The similar benefits were also allowed to some Assistant Cartographer and Data Entry Operators. Now, the University has taken action to recover some excess amount paid retrospectively despite instructions that excess amount erroneously granted to the petitioner may not be recoverable. The primary grievance of the petitioners, therefore, is that the benefit of annual increment granted on account of contractual service rendered on regular scale was allowed without any misrepresentation or fraud. Accordingly, the action to recover the amount, even any statedly paid in excess, would not be possible in view of the law laid down by the Full Bench of this Court in the case of Budh Ram and others versus State of Haryana and others 2009 (2) Law Herald Punjab and Haryana 1617.

Noticing this law, this Court had issued notice and had directed that the recovery shall not be effected till further orders. The position of law is not in any serious dispute. In fact, the counsel for the University has very fairly submitted before this Court that the petitioners were allowed regular pay scale and increment rightly and now have also been regularised. Accordingly, the recovery of the amount, even if paid in excess, would not be fair and possible, in view of the law laid down in Budh Ram's case (supra). The impugned order directing recovery from the petitioners, therefore, is quashed.

The writ petition is, accordingly, allowed.

(RANJIT SINGH )
JUDGE


SMT RAJBALA Versus REGISTRAR MAHARISHI DAYANAND UNIVERSITY AND ANOTH RSA 833 of 2010
Monday, 14th February, 2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Date of Decision: 14.02.2011

Smt. Rajbala ……Appellant
Versus
Registrar, Maharishi Dayanand University and another
……Respondents

Coram:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE L. N. MITTAL.

Present:
Mr. Ajit Sihag, Advocate for the appellant.

L.N. MITTAL, J. (ORAL)
CM No.2299-C of 2010
Heard.
This is application for condonation of delay of 281 days in refilling the appeal. It is alleged in the application that after Registry returned the appeal with some objections, the objections were removed, but Clerk of the counsel misplaced the brief in the bunch of decided cases.

I have heard learned counsel for the applicant-appellant and perused the case file.

The aforesaid averment made in the application even if taken at face value is not sufficient to condone the long delay of more than 9 months in re-filing the appeal. In fact this excuse is being raised almost in every case to seek condonation of long delay in re-filing the case. Such vague, general and specious averment cannot be accepted for condonation of long delay of 281 days in re-filing the appeal. It does not make out any ground much less sufficient ground for condoning the said delay. If such averment is accepted to condone such long delay, the law of limitation would be rendered completely infructuous.

For the reasons aforesaid, I find no merit in the instant
application which is accordingly dismissed.

Main Appeal.
Since application for condonation of delay in re-filing the
appeal has been dismissed, the appeal is liable to be dismissed on this ground. However, even on merit, the appellant cannot succeed.

Plaintiff-Rajbala, having almost failed in both the Courts below, has filed the instant second appeal.

Case of the plaintiff-appellant is that she appeared in improvement examination of Mathematics BA Part-II in April 1993 conducted by defendant No.2-University under Roll No.43933. However, her result of the said examination had not been declared by the defendants inspite of notice dated 25.01.1999 served on the defendants and information/clarification supplied on 27.05.1999.

Accordingly, the plaintiff sought declaration that her result of aforesaid examination be communicated to her by the defendants.

Defendants resisted the suit and broadly denied the plaint
allegations. It was alleged that in the notice, the plaintiff alleged her Roll number as 43938, but the said Roll number pertained to one Madhu Bala, who remained absent in the said examination. Vide letters dated 15.02.1999 and 02.04.1999, defendants asked the plaintiff to supply correct particulars, but she failed to do so. Various other pleas were also raised.

Learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Charkhi Dadri vide judgment and decree dated 10.05.2006 dismissed the plaintiff’s suit. First appeal preferred by plaintiff has been partly allowed by learned District Judge, Bhiwani vide judgment and decree dated 13.01.2009. Feeling aggrieved, plaintiff has filed the instant second appeal.

I have heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused
the case file.

Learned counsel for the appellant emphatically contended that the lower appellate Court has returned the finding that the plaintiff did appear in the examination in question, but relief of declaration of plaintiff’s result of the said examination has been declined as records of the said examination have since been destroyed by the defendants on expiry of requisite period.

However, learned counsel for the appellant is unable to explain as to how defendants can now be directed to declare the result of alleged examination when records thereof are not available with the defendants. Court cannot pass a decree which is incapable of being executed. For this situation, the plaintiff-appellant has herself to blame.

She allegedly appeared in the examination in April 1993, but for the first time, she approached the defendants for declaration of her result vide notice dated 25.01.1999 i.e after almost 6 years. Defendants destroyed the records after five years. There is no explanation why the plaintiffappellant remained silent for almost six years. On the contrary, it would indicate that the plaintiff actually might not have appeared in the examination and she approached the defendants after destruction of the records of the examination. The suit is also time barred having been filed more than six years after the plaintiff allegedly appeared in the examination. There cannot be said to be continuing cause of action as sought to be canvassed on behalf of the appellant.

The suit was filed at Charkhi Dadri, but Court at Charkhi Dadri had no territorial jurisdiction to try the suit. The plaintiff allegedly appeared in the examination at Rohtak.

Defendant-University is also at Rohtak. Consequently, no part of cause of action arose within the territorial jurisdiction of Court at Charkhi Dadri. Merely because the plaintiff is resident of Tehsil Charkhi Dadri, Court at Charkhi Dadri would not acquire territorial jurisdiction to try the suit, when no part of cause of action arose within the territorial jurisdiction of the said Court. Learned Trial Court brushed aside the said objection of the defendants by observing that the case being at final stage, it would not be proper to return the plaint to the plaintiff. However, even for this situation, the plaintiff herself is to be blamed because the defendants raised this objection in the written statement itself i.e. at the earlier stage. Thus examined from any angle, no further relief can be granted to the plaintiff appellant in the instant second appeal. No question of law, much less substantial question of law, arises for determination in the instant second appeal.

Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed in limine, being devoid of merit.

(L. N. MITTAL)
JUDGE


INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY AND MANAGEMENT Versus SHAINA and ANOTHER RSA No 744 of 2011
Monday, 14th February, 2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH

DATE OF DECISION: FEBRUARY 14, 2011

Institute of Technology and Management …. Appellant
Versus
Shaina and another …. Respondents

CORAM :-
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L. N. MITTAL.

PRESENT:
Mr. Saurabh Dalal, Advocate for the appellant.

L.N. MITTAL, J. (ORAL)
Defendant No.1 Institute of Technology and Management (in short, the Institute) having failed in both the courts below has come up by way of instant second appeal.

Respondent No.1-plaintiff Ms.Shaina filed suit against defendant No.1-appellant and defendant-respondent No.2 Maharishi Dayanand University, Rohtak. Facts in this case are not very much in dispute.

The plaintiff is student of defendant No.1- Institute, for Information and Technology course for sessions 2008-2012.

The plaintiff was admitted in the Institute in August, 2008 in first Semester and appeared in its examination in January, 2009. Second Semester was to commence from January, 2009, but due to some incidents in the Institute, the second Semester commenced late i.e. in last week of February, 2009.

Plaintiff's case is that she suffered fever and was advised rest for 8 days from 24.03.2009 to 31.03.2009 by Doctors of Tirath Ram Hospital, Gurgaon. She was advised further rest by Doctors of General Hospital, Gurgaon.

Consequently, her attendance fell short of the minimum requirement of 75%. However, defendant No.1-Institute has power to condone the short attendance to the extent of 25% of the total lecturers inter alia on the ground of illness of the student as provided in the Ordinance of the University. On account of jaundice, the plaintiff could not attend the classes and, therefore her attendance fell short but it was still above the mark of 50%. University issued roll number for the plaintiff for appearing in second Semester examination. The plaintiff even appeared in practical examinations of second Semester, which were conducted from 29.04.2009 till 03.05.2009.

However, thereafter defendant No.1 detained the roll number of plaintiff for the remaining (theory) examinations of second Semester. The plaintiff filed suit against said action of
defendant No.1.

Defendants No.1 and 2 in their separate but similar written
statements justified the action of defendant No.1 in declining permission to the plaintiff to appear in the examination. She remained irregular in attending the class since 24.03.2009 onwards. It was also pleaded that plaintiff's total attendance was 49% and, therefore, even after condoning shortage of attendance to the extent of 25%, she was not eligible to appear in the examinations.

Various other pleas were also raised.

Learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Gurgaon vide judgment and decree dated 14.06.2010 decreed the plaintiff's suit. First appeal preferred by defendant No.1 has been dismissed by Learned Additional District Judge, Gurgaon vide judgment and decree dated 01.10.2010.

Feeling aggrieved, defendant No.1 has filed the instant second appeal.

I have heard learned counsel for the appellant and perused the case file.

Plaintiff has led sufficient evidence to prove that she was suffering from jaundice and, therefore, she could not attend the classes since 24.03.2009.

In this regard, she has examined Dr. Sanjay Verma (PW-6) from Tirath Ram Hospital where she was advised rest since 24.06.2009 till31.03.2009. Thereafter the plaintiff got treatment from Civil Hospital, Gurgaon since 01.04.2009.

Dr. Gulshan Arora, SMO of the said hospital has been examined as PW-3 and he has proved various certificates issued by the said hospital advising rest to the plaintiff, who was suffering from jaundice. In view of this reliable evidence, Courts below have concurrently found that there was sufficient case for condonation of short attendance of the plaintiff. Here it is to be noticed with significance that Ordinance of the University provides that shortage in attendance can be condoned not only on the ground of illness of the student, but also on the ground of illness or death of parents, brother, sister or other close family member and on any other reason beyond the control of the student, to the satisfaction of the Principal/Director of the College/ Institute or Head of the University Teaching Department. Thus the Ordinance is very literal in the matter of condonation of shortage in attendance, although on sufficient ground.

The Ordinance provides for condonation of shortage in attendance even on the ground of illness of parents, brother, sister or any other close family member of the student. In the instant case, however, the student herself fell ill. The Ordinance provides for condoning the shortage in attendance on this ground.

Learned counsel for the appellant contended that certificates produced by the plaintiff are procured ones.

The contention cannot be accepted.

Senior Medical Officer of the Civil Hospital appeared in witness box and his testimony could not be impeached in cross-examination. Even Doctor from private hospital has been examined regarding initial treatment of the plaintiff.

His statement also could not be shattered in cross- examination. Even if for a moment it be assumed that the private hospital might have tried to favour the plaintiff by issuing the medical certificate, the same could not be said about the certificates issued by Government Hospital from time to time in continuation of medical certificate of the private hospital. Consequently, there was sufficient ground for condonation of short attendance to the plaintiff as rightly held by the Courts below.

Learned counsel for the appellant next contended that the total attendance of the plaintiff was 48.78% and, therefore, even after condonation of 25%, the plaintiff was not eligible for appearing in the examination. This contention is also untenable. The plaintiff had opted for an additional subject of Communication Skills, which is not part of the usual curriculum.

Even if the plaintiff does not appear in the examination of the additional subject or does not opt for the same at all, she can still complete the course of Information Technology. After counting attendance in the said additional subject and the main subjects, the attendance fell short of 50%. However, admittedly the attendance in the main subjects only was well above the mark of 50% i.e. 51% according to defendant No.1 and 52% according to the plaintiff. Consequently, attendance in the main subjects being still above the benchmark of 50%, the suit has been rightly decreed by the Courts below.

Learned counsel for the appellant contended that if shortage in attendance is condoned liberally, it would give rise to tendency among the students to bunk the classes.

This Court shares this concern of the appellant- Institute.

Such tendency has to be curbed by all the stake holders and the Courts would be one with the educational Institutes in this effort. However, in the instant case, the plaintiff cannot be said to be non-serious student. Her attendance in the first semester was not short. It also appears that her attendance in subsequent semesters is also not short. Consequently, the plaintiff should not be deprived of her right to appear in the examination of second Semester, merely on the ground of apprehension of the appellant-Institute that permitting the plaintiff to appear in the examination by condoning the shortage of attendance would encourage other students to remain absent from classes.

Concurrent finding recorded by the courts below in favour of the plaintiff is justified by the evidence on record and is supported by cogent reasons. The said finding is not based on misreading or miss-appreciation of evidence nor it is shown to be perverse or illegal so as to warrant interference in second appeal. No question of law, much less substantial question of law, arises for determination in the instant second appeal.

Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed in limine.

(L. N. MITTAL)
JUDGE


SATBIR SINGH Versus M D UNIVERSITY ROHTAK and ANOTHER Civil Writ Petition 8903 of 2009
Tuesday, 8th February, 2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

DATE OF DECISION: FEBRUARY 08, 2011

Satbir Singh …..Petitioner
VERSUS
M.D. University, Rohtak and another ….Respondents

CORAM:-
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH

1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement?
2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

PRESENT:
Mr. Nilesh Bhardwaj, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. Anurag Goyal, Advocate, for respondent No.1.
None for respondent No.2.

RANJIT SINGH, J.
The petitioner is aggrieved against the action of the respondents in not considering him for promotion to the post of
Assistant Security Officer. Post of Assistant Security Officer is a promotional post for Gun Man/ Head Security Man/ Security Guard.

The promotion is to be made on the basis of seniority-cum- merit.

Some basic educational qualification have also been prescribed. It is provided that the incumbent should be matric and must have 10 years experience as Security Guard or 5 years experience as Head Security Man or 3 years experience as Gun Man. The educational qualification being the same, the persons as Gun Man, Head Security Man and Security Guard, will be eligible for consideration for promotion depending upon fulfilling the criteria of experience.

The grievance of the petitioner is that though he was eligible for consideration, but was not promoted to the post of Assistant Security Officer and even not considered while respondent No.2, who was working as Gun man and much junior to the petitioner in the seniority list has been considered and promoted. The petitioner has placed on record the seniority list showing his name at seniority No.23, whereas respondent No.2 is shown at seniority No.115.

The justification offered by the University is that respondent No.2 has wrongly been shown in the seniority list. It is shown that he is holding a Class III post, whereas the petitioner is class IV employee. This averment appears to have been made
without providing any justifiable proof. The name of the petitioner as well as respondent No.2 is mentioned in the common seniority list of Class IV employees issued and annexed with the petition as Annexure P-2. The seniority list as such is not disputed, but it is stated that the name of respondent No.2 was inadvertently mentioned in the seniority list. So far respondent No.2 has not come forward to challenge the seniority list or to urge that he has been wrongly shown in the seniority list. There is no other seniority list containing seniority of Class III employees placed on record. The seniority list was issued on 1.12.1996 and the promotions had been made in the year 2007. At this late stage to urge that name of
respondent No.2 was inadvertently mentioned in the seniority list is apparently raised as a defence to justify the action of the
respondents. The counsel for the petitioner has rightly made
reference to the policy of promotion, which is annexed with the
petition as Annexure P-3. The promotion to the post of Assistant Security Officer is from Gun Man, Head Security Man and Security Guard by way of seniority-cum-merit.

Appointment to the said post can also be made by direct appointment. The Gun Man/Head Security Man/Security Guard having qualification of Matric and three years experience as Gun Man or 5 years experience as Head Security Man or 10 years experience as Security Guard, are eligible for consideration for promotion. The promotion concededly is to be
made on seniority-cum-merit. The justification of the University to not to consider the petitioner in terms of seniority could only be if he had not fulfilled the requirement of educational qualification or experience. That is not the case. The petitioner though is working as Security Guard, but is having 10 years experience, thus, he was fully eligible for consideration for promotion .

I have also perused the DPC proceedings where only name considered for promotion is that of respondent No.2. Once the other eligible persons were available for consideration, the University could not have ignored such persons for consideration for promotion. As per the policy, the petitioner as well as the other eligible persons would be entitled to be considered for promotion on the basis of policy seniority-cum-merit. Since the name of the petitioner was not considered for promotion, the impugned promotion can not be termed to be fairly made. Let the University now reconsider the case of all eligible candidates for promotion on the basis of policy, whichever is being applied for such promotions. The University would be at liberty to promote any eligible person in accordance with law.

The writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of.

( RANJIT SINGH )
JUDGE


TARA CHAND AND ANOTHER Versus MAHARSHI DAYANAND UNIVERSITY ROHTAK AND OTHERS CWP 20810 of 2010
Monday, 7th February, 2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB and HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

DATE OF DECISION : 7.2.2011

Tara Chand and another PETITIONERS
VERSUS
Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak and others RESPONDENTS

CORAM :
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER

Present:-
Shri R.S.Malik, Advocate for the petitioners.
Shri Anurag Goyal, Advocate for the respondents 1 and 2.
Ms.Savitri Bhandari, Advocate for respondent-3

MAHESH GROVER, J.
Learned counsel for the respondent/University states that the detailed mark-sheets of the petitioners have been dispatched to them and since this is the only prayer made in the writ petition, the same has been rendered infructuous.

Learned counsel for the petitioners has not controverted this fact.

Having regard to the aforesaid categoric statement which has been made by the learned counsel for the respondents, the instant petition is rendered infructuous and is disposed of as such.

(MAHESH GROVER)
JUDGE


SATISH SHARMA Versus MAHARISHI DAYANAND UNIVERSITY ROHTAK AND ANOTHER
Thursday, 3rd February, 2011
CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.18473 OF 2008

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

DATE OF DECISION: FEBRUARY 03 ,2011

Satish Sharma …..Petitioner
VERSUS
Maharishi Dayanand Univer s ity, Rohtak and another ….Respondents

CORAM:-
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH

1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement?
2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

PRESENT:
Mr. Ravi Kaant, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. Anurag Goyal, Advocate, for respondent No.1.
Mr. S. S. Patter, DAG, Haryana, for the State.

RANJIT SINGH, J. (ORAL)
The petitioner, who was working as Foreman (Press) in Maharishi Dayanand University, Rohtak, has filed this writ petition, seeking direction for quashing of orders dated 14.7.2003 (Annexure P-4) and 12.12.2005 (Annexure P-11).

The request of the petitioner for grant of pay scale of `5500-9000 has been declined through these orders.

The petitioner would submit that the same pay scale is being allowed to Foreman working in the University Press or the Government Press but still, the petitioner has not been allowed this scale and is given pay scale of `5000-7850. The petitioner had earlier submitted a representation, Annexure P-5, to the authorities to re-consider and grant him the pay scale of `5500-9000 with effect from 3.3.2001. The petitioner was apprised that a recommendation in this regard has been made to the Government. The petitioner thereafter had filed Civil Writ Petition No.6832 of 2004, which was disposed of by this Court on 29.4.2004. The petitioner had then submitted a registered notice for grant of equal pay for equal work, which was followed by various reminders. When no action was taken, the petitioner filed Civil Writ Petition No.10484 of 2005. This writ petition was disposed of with a direction to the respondents to pass a speaking order. Pursuant to the said direction, Financial
Commissioner & Principal Secretary to Government Haryana,
Education Department, has now passed an order, Annexure P-11, rejecting the claim of the petitioner for grant of pay scale of `5500- 9000. While rejecting the claim, it is observed that there is no specific recommendation made by the Registrars' Committee for granting said pay scale to the Foreman.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed on record the report of the Registrars' committee and would refer to that part
where the Committee has recommended pay scale of `5500-9000 to the Foreman working in the University instead of pay scale of `5000- 7850. Counsel accordingly submits that the Financial Commissioner was totally misconceived in saying that there is no recommendation made in the report of Registrars' Committee, on the basis of which the claim of the petitioner for grant of pay scale of `5500-9000 was rejected.

State counsel, when asked to respond, states that the recommendations of Registrars' Committee was received subsequent to the date of decision and accordingly could not be
taken note of. In my view, the case for grant of pay scale to the
petitioner would require re-consideration.

Let the matter be re-considered by the State not only in the light of recommendation made by the Registrars' Committee but any other relevant material, which may need to be taken into consideration while considering the claim of the petitioner for grant of pay scale as claimed.

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.

(RANJIT SINGH )
JUDGE


GAGANDEEP MITTAL AND OTHERS Vs STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS Civil Writ Petition 4118 of 2008
Monday, 21st April, 2008


NEETU Vs MAHARISHI DAYANAND UNIVERSITY AND ORS C W P 14307 of 2007
Monday, 21st April, 2008
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Date of Decision:21.04.2008

Neetu …..Petitioner
versus
Maharishi Dayanand University and others …..Respondents.

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA AND
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA.

Present: Mr.Sachin Mittal, Advocate, for the petitioner.

ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA, J.(Oral)
The petitioner has prayed that the directions be issued to the
respondents to issue a correct final result cum detailed marks card for the Ist Semester Examination held in January, 2005 in respect of Bachelor of Computer Application Course.

Written statement has been filed on behalf of respondents No.1 to 3 wherein it has been averred that the final result of the petitioner has already been declared for the aforementioned course and Detailed Marks Card dated 06.07.2007 has also been issued to the petitioner.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Detailed Mark Card (Annexure P-5) is the correct Marks Card of the petitioner.

In view of the above, this writ petition has been rendered infructuous and the same is dismissed as having been rendered infructuous.

(ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA)
JUDGE

(KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA)
JUDGE


JAI PARKASH Vs STATE OF HARYANA AND ANR CWP 10803 of 2007
Monday, 3rd March, 2008
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

DATE OF ORDER: 3.3.2008

Jai Parkash ….Petitioner(s)
Versus
State of Haryana and Another …..Respondent(s)

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH

Present:
Mr. Amrit Paul, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. Harish Rathee, Sr. DAG, Haryana, for the respondents.
JASBIR SINGH,J (ORAL)

When notice of motion was issued on 20.7.2007, following contention of counsel for the petitioner was noticed by this Court: “The petitioner is aggrieved by the order Annexure P.7 dated 24.5.2007 issued by respondent No.2 by which he is sought to be retired with effect from 31.7.2007 at the age of 58 years.

Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was working as a Sanitary Inspector in the Medical College, Rohtak, prior to its take over by the Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak, on 1.7.1976 and he remained in the service of the
University till it was taken over vide Identure dated 29.11.1978 (Annexure P.1). It is submitted that as per para 7 of the Identure the State Government had taken over the entire staff of the Medical College including the staff recruited by the University exclusively for the affairs of the Medical College and its other institutions. It is contended that vide policy of the State Government Annexure P.2, it was clarified that the age of retirement of the employees mentioned as (i) Employees (both teaching and non-teaching) taken over by the Government and (ii) Employees (both teaching and non-teaching) recruited by the M.D.U after taking over the
Medical College, Rohtak, till its control was again taken over by the Government would be 60 years whereas the petitioner is being retired at the age of 58 years.

Learned counsel further submits that in the case of one Karan Singh who was working as a Laboratory Technician at Pt B.D Sharma, PGIMS, Rohtak (new name of former Medical College, Rohtak) the retirement age has been mentioned as 60
years. On the basis of the above, it is contended that the petitioner cannot be retired at the age of 58 years.”

Shri Rathee, Sr. DAG, Haryana, has put on record copy of order dated 28.1.2008. Relevant contents of the order reads thus:

“In terms of Govt memo No.1/104/95-3HB-IV dated 22.1.2008 Sh. Jai Parkash, Pharmacist will retire from Govt service on 31.7.2009 on attaining the superannuation age of 60 years. As such, the office order issued vide this office Endst No.2MEII/ 07/4381-83 dated 26.7.2007 are hereby withdrawn. These
orders may also be considered as extension in his service beyond the age of 58 years to 60 years i.e upto 31.7.2009.”

We feel that in view of the order, this writ petition has become infructuous and is disposed of accordingly.

( JASBIR SINGH )
JUDGE

( JASWANT SINGH )
JUDGE


RAVI HANDA Versus STATE OF HRY
Friday, 11th May, 2007
Crl. Misc. No. 27455-M of 2007

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANIGARH

Date of decision : 11.05.2007

Ravi Handa …. Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana … Respondent

CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.D. ANAND

Present :
Mr. K.S. Ahluwalia, Senior Advocate with
Mr. J.S. Rattu, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. S.S. Mor, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Haryana.

S.D. Anand, J.
The petitioner is Principal of the Institute of Management and Technology, Faridabad. In that capacity, he was custodian of the relevant sealed packets of question papers for first semester of M.B.A. Examination which was to be held on 28.12.2005. The institute, of which the petitioner is the Principal, was one of the Examination Centres for purposes of the paper IBE. The University got information that the paper had been leaked out at Faridabad. On ascertainment of facts, it was found that Satinder Sheoran son of Sher Singh, a student of first year of National Institute of Law, Faridabad, was selling the question paper aforementioned to the students of Faridabad, who were studying for their ME Programme on 27.01.2005. The residential address and the landline/mobile telephone numbers of the above person were ascertained as under:-

0125-222712, 09315630535 and 09313579241.

It also transpired that it was the same person, who had been arrested by the police last year for leaking out a particular paper of MD University, Rohtak.

The packets were sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory, Haryana, Madhuban, Karnal (for short `FSL') by the University. It recorded a report that there was no tampering with the seal impressions. However, the Central Forensic Science Laboratory, Chandigarh (for short `CFSL') recorded a finding to the contrary. On factual front, it was found that out of seven seals on the packet containing question paper, there was a crack in
one of the seals.

In support of the bail plea, the learned counsel for the petitioner argues that the Investigating Agency did not find anything incriminating against the petitioner and it was on that account only that it (Investigating Agency) had submitted a cancellation report on 03.06.2006.

However, that averment does not advance the petitioner's plea any further in view of the own stance of the petitioner in the bail application itself that he had no idea whether the cancellation report submitted by the police had been approved by the Superintendent of Police or not. On his own showing, he had also no idea whether the cancellation report had been submitted in the Court of competent jurisdiction or not.

In that view of things, the petitioner cannot draw any sustenance, for the grant of relief, upon the fact of alleged cancellation report.

It is, then, argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the case is being raked up after a period of 1-1/2 years. The future prospects of the petitioner, learned counsel proceeds to argue, would be adversely
effected if he were to be taken into custody by the police.

Learned Senior Deputy Advocate General, Haryana, appearing for the State of Haryana, argues that the petitioner cannot escape accountability for the leakage of question paper. He further argues that such like instances are on the increase and the Courts must deal with such acts with a stern hand. He further argues that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner would be required to go deep into the matter and to find out the methodology adopted by the quarters concerned in the context.

It is a matter of common observation that such like instances of leakage of question paper are on the increase. Every now and then one hears a report about the leakage of a question paper here and there. Such like episodes affect the very credibility of the educational system. The confidence of the student community also gets eroded by such reports.

On facts relatable to the present case, the petitioner cannot be allowed to place greater reliance upon the report of the State FSL when the CFSL had reported the contrary.

I quite agree with the learned Senior Deputy Advocate General, Haryana, that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner may well be required in order to be able to find out the identity of the nefarious quarters behind a such like exercise.

In the light of the foregoing discussion, I do not find any just ground to allow anticipatory bail to the petitioner. The plea raised by him in the relevant behalf shall stand declined accordingly.

( S.D. Anand )
Judge


Criminal Appeal 232 DBA of 2000
Wednesday, 30th January, 2008
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

Date of decision: 30.01.2008

State of Haryana. —–Appellant.
Vs.
Ravinder. —–Respondents.
AND Criminal Appeal No.233-DBA of 2000
State of Haryana. —–Appellant.
Vs.
Ravinder and others. —–Respondents.
AND
Criminal Revision No.1200 of 1999 Mahender Singh Dahiya. —–Petitioner.
Vs.
Ravinder and another. —–Respondents.

CORAM:-
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S. D. ANAND

Present:
Mr. P.S. Sullar, DAG, Haryana for the appellant.
Mr. Vinod Ghai, Advocate,
Mr. Pawan Girdhar, Advocate,
Mr. Ashit Malik, Advocate for respondents.
—–
Criminal Appeal Nos.232and233-DBA of 2000 and
Criminal Revision No.1200 of 1999.

Adarsh Kumar Goel, J.
The State and the complainant are aggrieved by the acquittal of the respondents of the charge under Sections 302/34 IPC.

Case of the prosecution is that on 7.11.1996 at 11-30 A.M., Brijesh deceased alongwith his brother Rakesh Dahiya (PW-13) were in the office of their father Mohinder Singh Dahiya, who was employed as Secretary, Red Cross.

Brijesh left from there in a car after informing Rakesh that he was going to see Ravinder. Rakesh noticed Brijesh talking with Rameshwar. Rakesh received telephonic message at 12-15 P.M. from Shri O.P. Chaudhary, former Vice Chancellor, M.D. University,
Rohtak, who was related to the deceased that Brijesh was lying in hospital in injured condition. Rakesh went to the hospital at 2-20 P.M. and was told that Brijesh had died. His statement (Ex.PD) was recorded by the Inspector Ram Kishan, (PW-17), who conducted part
of the investigation while the part of investigation was done by Inspector Prem Singh (PW-18). Ravinder accused was represented by Jiwan Singh, Sarpanch (PW-14) before Prem Singh. On disclosure statement of Ravinder accused, a revolver, five cartridges, licence of
revolver, one key and a motorcycle were recovered. PW-14 Jiwan Singh deposed about extra judicial confession made by Ravinder accused before him. PW-15 Rameshwar deposed about having seen Ravinder accused firing a shot at the deceased. He further deposed that Sandeep stopped the car of Brijesh and gave him a threat to teach a lesson for quarreling in the college. His statement was recorded by the SHO of the Police Station on the same day.

The prosecution also examined Dr. O.P. Gujeria (PW-1), who conducted post-mortem examination and found bullet and seven injuries. Six of the injuries are fire-arm injuries on vital parts.

The accused denied the prosecution allegations and led defence evidence about election rivalry in college elections.

The trial Court did not find the evidence led by the prosecution to be satisfactory, inter-alia, for the following reasons:-

(i) Version given by eyewitness Rameshwar was not reliable as his statement (Ex.DF) was recorded by the police on 7.11.1996, but in a copy of report dated 12.11.1996 recorded by Inspector Ram Kishan (Ex.DG/1), it was stated that the police had not been able to find out the clue of the murder. Thus, recording of his statement on 7.11.1996 was doubtful. The witness was not a reliable one. He was facing several criminal cases. The accused was arrested on 23.11.1996 and they were produced by PW-14 Jiwan Singh. If their involvement was known earlier, they would have been arrested earlier.

(ii) PW-18 Prem Singh, Inspector admitted that when
investigation was given to him on 17.11.1996, there was
no clue about the murder and it was on account of that that special investigation team was constituted vide order (Ex.DG/2);

(iii) Version of extra judicial confession given by Jiwan Singh (PW-14) was not reliable. He was related to the deceased and the accused would not have reposed confidence in him. We have heard learned counsel for the State and perused the record.

We are unable to hold that the view taken by the trial Court that PW-15 Rameshwar could not be relied upon as an eyewitness as for several days, thereafter, the case was treated as without any clue leading to constitution of a special investigation team and if the said evidence is excluded from consideration, the remaining evidence was not enough to convict the accused.

Thus the view taken by the trial Court is a possible view
and is not liable to be interfered with.

While sitting in judgment over an acquittal the appellate
court is first required to seek an answer to the question whether the findings of the trial court are palpably wrong, manifestly erroneous or demonstrably unsustainable. If the appellate court answers the above
question in the negative the order of acquittal is not to be disturbed.

Conversely, if the appellate court holds, for reasons to be recorded, that the order of acquittal cannot at all be sustained in view of any of the above infirmities it can then and then only reappraise the evidence to arrive at its own conclusions. ( R amesh Babulal Doshi v. S tate of Gujarat AIR 1996 SC 2035).

In view of above, we do not find any ground to interfere
with the impugned order.

Accordingly, the criminal appeals as well as criminal
revision are dismissed.

( ADARSH KUMAR GOEL )
JUDGE

( S. D. ANAND )
JUDGE


HAWA SINGH Versus MAHARISHI DAYANAND UNIVERSITY ROHTAK CWP 10422 of 1988
Friday, 25th January, 2008
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB and HARYANA, CHANDIGARH

Date of Decision: Jan. 25,2008

Hawa Singh and others ……………………………………… Petitioners
Versus
The Maharishi Dayanand University, Rohtak ………. Respondent

Coram:
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ashutosh Mohunta

Present:
Mr. Rajbir Sherawat, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. Ashok Aggarwal, Sr. Advocate with
Mr. Nilesh Bhardwaj, Advocate for the respondent.
….
ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA, J.
The petitioners have prayed that directions be issued to the Maharishi Dayanand University (hereinafter referred to as `MDU') to pay them arrears of pay from the date of their promotion with retrospective effect.

Briefly the facts of the case are that the petitioners were initially appointed with Kurukshetra University as Clerks. On formation of MDU at Rohtak in the year 1976, initially only those colleges which were situated in Rohtak district were affiliated to it but subsequently the colleges situated in district Bhiwani, Sonepat, Gurgaon, Mohindergarh and Faridabad which were earlier affiliated to Kurukshetra University
were transferred and affiliated with MDU. On a requisition made by MDU, Kurukshetra University asked the option of the staff employed in the Kurukshetra University for their absorption in MDU with a clear stipulation that their seniority or the service rendered by them in the Kurukshetra University shall be considered to be service by the transferee university as well. The petitioners gave their options to be transferred to MDU and have been working in the said University since then. The question regarding the inter-se seniority from amongst the officials who had been taken over from Kurukshetra University i.e. the petitioners and the employees who were recruited by MDU directly arose. The MDU authorities decided that promotion posts should be filled from amongst the employees who had come from Kurukshetra University and the employees who were recruited directly by MDU on 50:50 basis.

This criteria was challenged by some of the petitioners on the ground that as they had been recruited much prior to some of the persons who were recruited by MDU, hence they should be given seniority. The civil suit filed by some of the petitioners was decreed by the Senior Sub Judge, Rohtak, vide judgment dated 14.2.1985. While decreeing the suit, the trial Court had held as
under:-

“The defendant No.1 University is directed to prepare a single integrated seniority list of the whole cadre of the Clerks according to their length of service irrespective of the fact whether they were transferred to M.D. University, Rohtak
from Kurukshetra University, Kurukshetra, or they had joined M.D. University initially. After preparation of such an integrated single seniority list of all the Clerks, the promotion of the plaintiffs and other be effected in accordance with their
seniority of the old list. The plaintiffs be given promotion with retrospective effect if they are found senior as per integrated single seniority list.”

This judgment was challenged by the University by filing an appeal which was allowed and the judgment Annexure P1 was set aside.

However, RSA No. 3524 of 1985 was filed and this Court set aside the judgment of the first Appellate Court and restored the judgment Annexure P-1.

From the aforementioned facts it is clear that the University had to prepare a single integrated seniority list of the entire cadre of Clerks according to their length of service irrespective of the fact whether they were transferee MDU from Kurukshetra University or they had joined MDU
directly.

As the benefits were not being given to the petitioners despite the directions by the High Court in RSA No. 3524 of 1985, some of the
petitioners namely Hawa Singh and Ishwar Singh Tikoria filed another suit for mandatory injunction. The University filed its written statement wherein
the stand taken by them was as follows:-

“That the rights of seniority and other financial benefits will be granted to the plaintiffs with retrospective effect as per judgment/clarification of this Hon'ble Court and as such the plaintiffs would not suffer in any way.”

In pursuance to the aforementioned stand of the respondents, the suit was withdrawn by the plaintiffs.

The respondent University implemented the decision by giving directions with retrospective effect to all the Clerks who were concerned.

However, while giving seniority and promotions to the petitioners with retrospective effect, no arrears were paid to the petitioners and the same were fixed notionally only. It is because of this decision of the University not to pay any arrears to the petitioners that the present writ petition has been filed.

Mr. Rajbir Sehrawat, counsel for the petitioners, submits that once the petitioners have been given their seniority and promotions with retrospective effect than they are also entitled to the benefit of arrears from the date they were promoted.

Learned counsel has placed reliance on the
judgments in Indraj Singh v. State of Haryana reported as 2001 (2) SCT 214 wherein it has been held that an employee who has been promoted with retrospective effect would be entitled to the benefits of arrears from the date he was promoted. The petitioners have also placed reliance on Karnail Singh v. Punjab State Electricity Board and others 2006 (4) RSJ 671
wherein it has been held that the petitioner cannot be denied the monetary benefits of higher post to which promotion has already been granted by way of deemed date of promotion.

In reply to the aforementioned arguments, the stand of the respondent University is that as the petitioners have never worked from the date when they have been given their promotions, hence, they are not entitled to any arrears of pay.
After hearing the counsel for the parties, I am of the considered opinion that the petitioners were wrongly denied their seniority and promotions from the date it became due. The promotions were given to the petitioners with retrospective effect much later and, hence, the petitioners
cannot be denied the arrears of their salary. The petitioners have been deprived of the benefits of promotion for no fault of their although they were eligible for the same, and as the mistake of not paying the arrears lays solely with the University, hence, the petitioners cannot be denied the arrears of pay. In Vidya Parkash Harnal v. State of Haryana 1995 (3) SCT 785 this Court while relying upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in Union of India etc. v. K.V. Jankiraman etc. AIR 1991 Supreme Court 2010 has observed as under:-

“Similarly, the argument that the petitioner was not entitled to the grant of emoluments on the principle of “no work, no pay” is apparently misconceived and based upon wrong notions of
law. If a civil servant is not offered the work to which he waslegally entitled, he cannot be deprived of the wages for the post to which he subsequently is held entitled to. Permitting such a course to be adopted would be encouraging the
imposition of double penalty, that is firstly by declining the civil servant his right of promotion and secondly by depriving him of the emoluments to which he would have been entitled to upon promotion which subsequently is considered in his favour. Deprivation to work against the post to which a civil servant is entitled on promotion is always at the risk and responsibility of the State and cannot be made a basis for depriving such a civil servant of the emoluments to which he was entitled, had he been promoted in accordance with the rules at the time when he become eligible for such promotion.

The Courts cannot ignore the magnitude of the sufferings and the pains to which a civil servant is subjected on account of deprivation of the monetary benefits particularly in this case of
skyrocketing prices and non-availability of essential requirements of livelihood. The Court cannot shut its eyes and forget the holocast of economic deprivation to the petitioner and his dependents. Such a deprivation might have upset the career of the dependents, depriving the society of the services of such youth and budding dependents or children of the petitioner. The executive once being satisfied that a civil servant was entitled to the promotion with retrospective effect cannot deprive him of the benefits of salary accruing on account of such promotion from an early date without assigning valid, cogent and specific reasons. The order impugned in this case by which the petitioner/appellant was deprived of his right to claim back wages is admittedly nonspeaking without assigning any justification or cogent and specific reasons.”

The same view has further been reiterated by this Court in Civil Writ Petition No. 11749 of 1996, Krishan Kumar v. The Haryana State Federation of Consumers Co-operative Wholesale Stores Ltd. and another, decided on 10.12.1996: 1997 (1) SCT 686 (PandH) (DB), wherein the promotion order carrying a condition of non-payment of arrears of salary to the extent of the condition was quashed.

In view of the aforementioned facts, the prayer of the petitioners to pay them the arrears of pay is absolutely justified.

Resultantly, the writ petition is allowed and directions are given to the respondents to pay the arrears of pay to the petitioners within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.

( ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA )
JUDGE


PARVEEN KUMAR Versus THE VICE CHANCELLOR KURUKSHETR CWP 10422 of 1988
Friday, 25th January, 2008
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB and HARYANA, CHANDIGARH

Date of Decision: Jan. 25,2008

Hawa Singh and others ……………………………………… Petitioners
Versus
The Maharishi Dayanand University, Rohtak ………. Respondent

Coram:
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ashutosh Mohunta

Present:
Mr. Rajbir Sherawat, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. Ashok Aggarwal, Sr. Advocate with
Mr. Nilesh Bhardwaj, Advocate for the respondent.
….
ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA, J.
The petitioners have prayed that directions be issued to the Maharishi Dayanand University (hereinafter referred to as `MDU') to pay them arrears of pay from the date of their promotion with retrospective effect.

Briefly the facts of the case are that the petitioners were initially appointed with Kurukshetra University as Clerks. On formation of MDU at Rohtak in the year 1976, initially only those colleges which were situated in Rohtak district were affiliated to it but subsequently the colleges situated in district Bhiwani, Sonepat, Gurgaon, Mohindergarh and Faridabad which were earlier affiliated to Kurukshetra University
were transferred and affiliated with MDU. On a requisition made by MDU, Kurukshetra University asked the option of the staff employed in the Kurukshetra University for their absorption in MDU with a clear stipulation that their seniority or the service rendered by them in the Kurukshetra University shall be considered to be service by the transferee university as well. The petitioners gave their options to be transferred to MDU and have been working in the said University since then. The question regarding the inter-se seniority from amongst the officials who had been taken over from Kurukshetra University i.e. the petitioners and the employees who were recruited by MDU directly arose. The MDU authorities decided that promotion posts should be filled from amongst the employees who had come from Kurukshetra University and the employees who were recruited directly by MDU on 50:50 basis.

This criteria was challenged by some of the petitioners on the ground that as they had been recruited much prior to some of the persons who were recruited by MDU, hence they should be given seniority. The civil suit filed by some of the petitioners was decreed by the Senior Sub Judge, Rohtak, vide judgment dated 14.2.1985. While decreeing the suit, the trial Court had held as
under:-

“The defendant No.1 University is directed to prepare a single integrated seniority list of the whole cadre of the Clerks according to their length of service irrespective of the fact whether they were transferred to M.D. University, Rohtak
from Kurukshetra University, Kurukshetra, or they had joined M.D. University initially. After preparation of such an integrated single seniority list of all the Clerks, the promotion of the plaintiffs and other be effected in accordance with their
seniority of the old list. The plaintiffs be given promotion with retrospective effect if they are found senior as per integrated single seniority list.”

This judgment was challenged by the University by filing an appeal which was allowed and the judgment Annexure P1 was set aside.

However, RSA No. 3524 of 1985 was filed and this Court set aside the judgment of the first Appellate Court and restored the judgment Annexure P-1.

From the aforementioned facts it is clear that the University had to prepare a single integrated seniority list of the entire cadre of Clerks according to their length of service irrespective of the fact whether they were transferee MDU from Kurukshetra University or they had joined MDU
directly.

As the benefits were not being given to the petitioners despite the directions by the High Court in RSA No. 3524 of 1985, some of the
petitioners namely Hawa Singh and Ishwar Singh Tikoria filed another suit for mandatory injunction. The University filed its written statement wherein
the stand taken by them was as follows:-

“That the rights of seniority and other financial benefits will be granted to the plaintiffs with retrospective effect as per judgment/clarification of this Hon'ble Court and as such the plaintiffs would not suffer in any way.”

In pursuance to the aforementioned stand of the respondents, the suit was withdrawn by the plaintiffs.

The respondent University implemented the decision by giving directions with retrospective effect to all the Clerks who were concerned.

However, while giving seniority and promotions to the petitioners with retrospective effect, no arrears were paid to the petitioners and the same were fixed notionally only. It is because of this decision of the University not to pay any arrears to the petitioners that the present writ petition has been filed.

Mr. Rajbir Sehrawat, counsel for the petitioners, submits that once the petitioners have been given their seniority and promotions with retrospective effect than they are also entitled to the benefit of arrears from the date they were promoted.

Learned counsel has placed reliance on the
judgments in Indraj Singh v. State of Haryana reported as 2001 (2) SCT 214 wherein it has been held that an employee who has been promoted with retrospective effect would be entitled to the benefits of arrears from the date he was promoted. The petitioners have also placed reliance on Karnail Singh v. Punjab State Electricity Board and others 2006 (4) RSJ 671
wherein it has been held that the petitioner cannot be denied the monetary benefits of higher post to which promotion has already been granted by way of deemed date of promotion.

In reply to the aforementioned arguments, the stand of the respondent University is that as the petitioners have never worked from the date when they have been given their promotions, hence, they are not entitled to any arrears of pay.

After hearing the counsel for the parties, I am of the considered opinion that the petitioners were wrongly denied their seniority and promotions from the date it became due. The promotions were given to the petitioners with retrospective effect much later and, hence, the petitioners cannot be denied the arrears of their salary. The petitioners have been deprived of the benefits of promotion for no fault of their although they were eligible for the same, and as the mistake of not paying the arrears lays solely with the University, hence, the petitioners cannot be denied the arrears of pay. In Vidya Parkash Harnal v. State of Haryana 1995 (3) SCT 785 this Court while relying upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in Union of India etc. v. K.V. Jankiraman etc. AIR 1991 Supreme Court 2010 has observed as under:-

“Similarly, the argument that the petitioner was not entitled to the grant of emoluments on the principle of “no work, no pay” is apparently misconceived and based upon wrong notions of
law. If a civil servant is not offered the work to which he was legally entitled, he cannot be deprived of the wages for the post to which he subsequently is held entitled to. Permitting such a course to be adopted would be encouraging the
imposition of double penalty, that is firstly by declining the civil servant his right of promotion and secondly by depriving him of the emoluments to which he would have been entitled to upon promotion which subsequently is considered in his favour. Deprivation to work against the post to which a civil servant is entitled on promotion is always at the risk and responsibility of the State and cannot be made a basis for depriving such a civil servant of the emoluments to which he was entitled, had he been promoted in accordance with the rules at the time when he become eligible for such promotion.

The Courts cannot ignore the magnitude of the sufferings and the pains to which a civil servant is subjected on account of deprivation of the monetary benefits particularly in this case of
skyrocketing prices and non-availability of essential requirements of livelihood. The Court cannot shut its eyes and forget the holocast of economic deprivation to the petitioner and his dependents. Such a deprivation might have upset the career of the dependents, depriving the society of the services of such youth and budding dependents or children of the petitioner. The executive once being satisfied that a civil servant was entitled to the promotion with retrospective effect cannot deprive him of the benefits of salary accruing on account of such promotion from an early date without assigning valid, cogent and specific reasons. The order impugned in this case by which the petitioner/appellant was deprived of his right to claim back wages is admittedly nonspeaking without assigning any justification or cogent and specific reasons.”

The same view has further been reiterated by this Court in Civil Writ Petition No. 11749 of 1996, Krishan Kumar v. The Haryana State Federation of Consumers Co-operative Wholesale Stores Ltd. and another, decided on 10.12.1996: 1997 (1) SCT 686 (PandH) (DB), wherein the promotion order carrying a condition of non-payment of arrears of salary to the extent of the condition was quashed.

In view of the aforementioned facts, the prayer of the petitioners to pay them the arrears of pay is absolutely justified.

Resultantly, the writ petition is allowed and directions are given to the respondents to pay the arrears of pay to the petitioners within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.

( ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA )
JUDGE


MAHARISHI DAYANAND UNIVERSITY Versus YAG DUTT AND ANR
Thursday, 22nd March, 2007
C. W.P. No. 4404 of 2007

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH

Date of decision: 22.03.2007

Maharishi Dayanand University, Rohtak ………Petitioner
Versus
Yag Dutt and another ………..Respondents

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH
HON'BL MRS. JUSTICE NIRMAL YADAV

Present:
Mr. V D Sharma, Advocate for
Mr. R.S.Tacoria, Advocate for the petitioner

J ASBIR SINGH , J. (Oral)
This writ petition has been filed with a prayer to quash the Award
dated 04.08.2006 (Annexure P-4), passed by the Industrial Tribunal-cum- Labour Court, Rohtak, ordering re-instatement of the respondent-workman with continuity of service and 50% back wages.

It has come on record that, initially, the respondent-workman was
appointed for a period of six months, on expiry of that period, he was not asked to leave the job, rather, allowed to continue and thrown out of the service on 06.01.1997. In that process, he had completed 240 days.

Admittedly, service of respondent-workman was terminated without payment of any compensation, the Court below on analyzing the evidence has observed, thus:-

There is merit in the contention of the learned AR for the workman. Taking into consideration that the workman was appointed on ad hoc basis for a period of 6 months and after expiry of the same the workman was never relieved from his job, rather he was formally relieved as per allegations of the management on 06.01.1997. No doubt no extension has been
given to the workman. But since he was in service and he has
also received the payment of the days for which he worked unauthorisedly as perversion of the management. But admittedly, he has been relieved on 06.01.1997 and thereafter on 18.12.1997 another person Raj Kumar son of Ram Kumar was appointed against the same post. It shows that the post was in existence when the workman was relieved and he has completed more than 240 days when service of the workman was terminated. Perusal of the file shows that the management has adopted the unfair labour practice because the noting of the personal file of the workman shows that the dealing hand has written that the workman is going to complete 240 days of his service and immediately after that the service of the workman was terminated without mentioning any reason. MW-1 has admitted in his cross examination that the work and conduct of the workman during his service period remained satisfactory. Not only this after relieving the workman one Raj Kumar son of Ram
Kumar was employed on the same post. It means when service of the workman was terminated this post of draftsman was in existence. In this way the service of the workman has been terminated in an arbitrary manner and it is case of violation of Section 25-F of the Industrial Disputes Act. The Management had relieved the workman on 06.01.1997 and Raj Kumar son of Ram Kumar was appointed on the same post on 18.12.1997. Raj Kumar was appointed because there was vacancy of draftsman and no extension was given to the workman. Hence, I decide this issue in favour of the workman and against the management.

We feel that the findin g is perfectly justified. Nothing has been
shown to the contrary, which may necessitate any interference.

The very fact that on expiry of the period of six months, for which the respondentworkman was appointed, his service was not terminated, rather he was allowed to continue in service, would mean deemed extension of his service.

No case is made out for interference.

Dismissed.

(JASBIR SINGH)
JUDGE

(NIRMAL YADAV)
JUDGE


MDU ROHTAK Versus SUDESH KUMARI No 2222 of 2004
Friday, 2nd March, 2007


R S DALAL Versus MAHARISHI DAYANAND UNIVERSITY ROHTAK C W P 19803 of 2004
Thursday, 1st February, 2007
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

DATE OF DECISION: 01-02-2007

RS Dalal, Assistant, Accounts Branch, Maharishi Dayanand University, Rohtak. …..PETITIONER
VERSUS
Maharishi Dayanand University, Rohtak, through its Registrar, Rohtak. …..RESPONDENT

CORAM:-
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R S MADAN

PRESENT:
Mr.Ramesh Hooda, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr.BL Gupta, Advocate for the respondent.

R S MADAN, J.
The petitioner is working as a Assistant, Accounts Branch, Maharishi Dayanand University, Rohtak and has 26 years of service to his credit. It was in the year 1992, one Rama Devi daughter of Shri VN Sharma got the Degree of Bachelor of Education. She applied for duplicate Degree of Bachelor of Education after completing the formalities. It was on 01-12-1998, the petitioner, who was working as Assistant in the Branch prepared the duplicate Degree on the basis of the result sheet.

The said result sheet and Degree was verified by various officials and the petitioner was one of them at the time of supplying the duplicate Degree. There was no suspicion of any type that the result sheet was fake. The duplicate Degree was given to Rama Devi. It was in the year 1999, the petitioner became suspicious about the genuineness of the result sheet and he brought the said fact into the knowledge of the higher officials that there seems to be a scandal for tampering with the result sheet. This step was appreciated by the higher officials and he was recommended for Award of Excellence for the year 1999. By that time, some duplicate Degrees and Detailed Mark Sheets had already been issued on the basis of the tampered result sheets and the petitioner was Assistant in the Accounts Branch, hence the petitioner and two others were placed under suspension on the allegation that they were involved in the tampering of record relating to the Examination Branch as well as dereliction in the discharge of their official duty. The copy of suspension order dated 09-01-2002 is attached herewith as Annexure P3.

The petitioner was charge-sheeted for the preparation of four duplicate DMCs/Degrees on the basis of the fake entries in the result sheet without proper verification and checking of the corroborative record and without proper application of mind. A copy of the charge-sheet dated 01-04-2002 is Annexure P4.

An Enquiry committee was appointed, which found that the petitioner was careless while preparing the duplicate Mark Sheets/Degrees as the concerned pages of the result sheet were detached from the main result sheet and were also folded and it was the duty of the petitioner to re-check the correction of the concerned entries from second source. On the basis of that, the petitioner was given show cause notice for minor punishment with respect to stoppage of two increments with cumulative effect. The true copy of show cause notice is Annexure P7.

It is pertinent to mention here that the University had appointed Mr.NS Ahlawat, District and Sessions Judge (Retd.) as Enquiry
officer to look into the matters of irregularities and to find out the person responsible for the lapses. The Enqiry Officer submitted his report dated 22-12-2002 and observed on the issue of the petitioner as under:

“delinquent Sh.Ranvir Singh Dalal has argued while taking a consistent stand as also find mentioned in his reply to the charge-sheet that he has prepared the duplicate DMCs/degrees
on the basis of original record which was supplied to him and in case the record itself was fake as supplied by the concerned branch cannot be held liable for preparing duplicate DMCs/degrees on their basis. However, this statement of Sh.Ranvir Singh Dalal is not tenable because he was bound to take due care and caution as he has admitted in his earlier
statement made before the Preliminary Enquiry Committee that result sheets of the candidates whose duplicate DMCs/degrees were prepared, some of the papers were fold and pages of the
results sheets were found dislocated from the main binding, undoubtedly the duplicate DMCs/degrees are to be prepared on the basis of result sheets supplied by the Result Branch as stated by Sh.Ranvir Singh Dalal. However, in the given case where he himself admitted that pages of the result sheets of the same were found folded and detached from the main result sheets, a person of his experience should have crossed checked the veracity of the aforementioned suspicious sheets from other
relevant record.

I n view of the above, it emerges from the oral as well as documentary evidence placed on record by the University that Sh.Ranvir Singh Dalal had prepared duplicate DMCs/degrees of
candidates in particulars as find mentioned in the charge sheet with negligence and in a irresponsible manner. However, there is no evidence on the record that the delinquent prepared aforementioned duplicate DMCs/degrees with any personal gain or extraneous consideration.

After the receipt of Enquiry Report, the Vice-Chancellor issued a show cause notice to the petitioner dated 14-8-2003 (Annexure P7) by giving an opportunity to show cause as to why a minor penalty of stoppage of two grade increments with cumulative effect be not imposed against him under Clasue-2 (A) (ii) of the Penalties, Appeal and Review Rules, Part-II of the M.D. University Service and Conduct Rules for Non- Teaching Employees, which are as under:

2. The following penalties may, for good and sufficient reasons, be imposed upon an employee:

Minor penalties:
i)Censure;
ii)Withholding of increments or promotion;
iii)Recovery from pay of the whole or part of any pecuniary loss caused to the University by negligence or breach of orders.

The only grievance of the petitioner is that the stoppage of two annual increments with cumulative effect falls within the mischief of major penalties whereas the intention of the Authority was to award minor punishment to the petitioner.

We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and are of the view that the Vice Chancellor himself was wanting to punish the
petitioner with minor penalty of stoppage of two annual increments with cumulative effect. It has not been brought to the notice of the Authority that stoppage of two increments with cumulative effect falls within the mischief of major penalty and not as a minor penalty. We, therefore, feel that ends of justice would be met if the punishment awarded to the petitioner is reduced to the minor penalty of stoppage of two annual increments without cumulative effect.

In view of the above, this writ petition is partly allowed on the terms indicated above.

( R S MADAN )
JUDGE

(ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA)
JUDGE


VIVEK CHAND SHARMA ETC Versus UOI ETC CWP 19146 of 2004
Monday, 15th January, 2007
(O and M)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH

Date of decision: 15.1.2007

Vivek Chand Sharma and others Petitioners
Versus
Union of India and others …Respondents.

CORAM:-
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S.GAREWAL
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA

Present:
Mr. Shailender Jain, Advocate, for the petitioners.
Mr. RS Kundu, Additional Advocate General, Haryana No. 2 to 5.
Mr. Amandeep Singh, Advocate, for respondent No.6.
Mr. Deepak Balyan Advocate, for
Mr. Gaurav M. Liberhan, Advocate, for respondent No. 9.

K.S.GAREWAL, J.
The petitioners are Vivek Chand Sharma, his wife and their three children. The petitioners are seeking quashing of the acquisition of their residential house, Smriti Sthal, Temple, Orchard and other construction, which have been acquired by the State of Haryana for development and utilization as residential/commercial area of Sector 9, Jhajjar. The notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) was published on August 14, 2003 (Annexure P/10). This was followed by a declaration under Section 6 which was published on August 10, 2004 (Annexure P/24).

The petitioners have pleaded that they were owners of 99 kanals 9 marlas of the land situated in village Jhajjar. The property was
inherited by them from their ancestors and was thus ancestral property. The land was situated on the Jhajjar-Bahadurgarh-Delhi road and had very good potential. The petitioners described in detail the extent of land which was covered under the residential house by giving the field numbers. Similarly, the land under the security room, Smriti Sthal of the fore-father of Chander Bal, land covered under Sham Mandir, water tank, well, cattle shed, generator room and fruit bearing orchard of amrood and jamuns. There was also an orchard of ber, amla, anar as well as a fish pond on the property.

The petitioners pleaded that petitioner 1 Vivek Chand Sharma
was a former Vice-Chancellor of Maharishi Dayanand University, Rohtak, from 1994 to1997 and was, at the time of filing of the petition, Vice President of the Haryana Pradesh Congress Committee. The family was a renowned family of the area and enjoyed high status. Late Chander Bal whose samadi existed on the land was son of a well known freedom fighter Narender Singh.

After the notification under Section 4 of the Act, the petitioners
lodged their objection petition on September 1, 2003, copy of which has been annexed as Annexure P/13. The objections ran into many pages, but the primary objection was that in case of Jhajjar, the draft development plan had not been finalised and in the absence of the plan, the development could not be carried out. Secondly, within the acquired land there was a compact block which consisted of some constructed portion, a place for worship and a memorial of the petitioners' fore-father as well as a fruit orchard. The petitioners had a legitimate expectation that the above areas would be released from acquisition. This was also the declared policy of the Government of Haryana, who had been releasing the constructed portions from acquisition, with some area around the construction for the beneficial enjoyment of the building.

According to the petitioners, a notice was received by them from the Land Acquisition Collector in respect of the hearing of their
objection dated September 1, 2003. The objectors were required to be present on January 13, 2004 for producing evidence in support of their objections. In response to this notice, the petitioners' filed an application under Section 14 of the Act seeking to summon nine witnesses to prove and substantiate their objections.

No order was passed on this application but the petitioners
received another notice calling upon them to appear before the Collector on April 26, 2004 at 3.30 p.m. The Collector also notified petitioner 1 that the acquired land shall be inspected by him on April 26, 2004 at 1 p.m. The petitioners contend that these notices were received by them at 3.30 p.m. on April 26, 2004. According to the petitioners, the Land Acquisition Collector had himself come to their residence at about 3.30 p.m. and handed over the notice but he did not carry out any spot inspection. He merely recorded the statement of petitioner 1. No orders were passed on the objections and no proper opportunity of hearing was granted to the petitioners on that day or on any date thereafter.

The main ground to challenge the acquisition is that the petitioners' objections under Section 5-A of the Act were not properly considered and the petitioners did not get an opportunity to lead evidence.

Land Acquisition Collector filed a reply to the petition on his behalf and on behalf of respondents 2 and 4 as well. The Collector pleaded that the petitioners had indeed filed objections under Section 5-A of the Act.

Petitioner 1 had appeared before the Collector himself and his statement was recorded. The Collector had given full opportunity of personal hearing to the landowners and interested persons who had filed objections. After hearing the objections, the Collector sent his report on the individual objections. Joint Site Inspection Committee also sent its report to the Government.

After considering the report of the Collector and Joint Site Inspection Committee's report, land measuring 1 kanal (605 square yards) was left out from the acquisition, whereas the remaining land was included in the declaration under Section 6 of the Act.

The petitioners' entire property was covered under the Section 4
notification. It was a substantial tract of land of about 100 kanals (or 12.5 acres). Out of this area, about 2-1/2 acres was part of the residential area while remaining 10 acres was the orchard.

The petitioners' main objection was that at least the house, which was bounded by a wall and which consisted of Smriti Sthal, temple cattle sheds etc. should have been released from acquisition. The respondents had only released an area of 1 kanal (605 square yards or 1/8th in acre). The grievance of the petitioners was that their objections have not been properly considered, they had been denied an opportunity to lead evidence. Notice for presenting evidence was served on them on the afternoon of the day which the Collector had fixed for hearing
objections. The Collector had come to the petitioners' house and recorded the statement of petitioner 1, but no evidence was taken or permitted to be led.

Learned counsel for the petitioners relied upon Hindustan Petroleum Corpn. Limited Versus Darius Shapur Chenai and others 2005 (7) Supreme Court Cases 627 to argue that Section 5-A confers a valuable right in favour of the person whose land was sought to be acquired. Hearing given to the person must be an effective one and not a mere formality.

Formation of opinion as regards the suitability of the land for acquisition must be preceded by application of mind, consideration of relevant factors and rejection of irrelevant ones.

The circumstances of the above case were quite different, therefore, the precedent laid down by the Supreme Court may not be applicable to the petitioners' case. In Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited' case, Caltex (India ) Limited had been leased the acquired land later Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited (HPCL) became the lessee.

The lease deed, after renewal, finally ended in 1979. Thereupon the owners or the lessors filed a suit for eviction of the lessee.

The suit was decreed and the appeal was also dismissed.

Thereafter, HPCL sought acquisition of the said land under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act. Notification was issued under Section 4 of the Act to which the lessors/landowners objected but the declaration under Section 6 of the Act was issued soon thereafter. The acquisition was challenged by the landowners. The writ petition was allowed by the High Court.

Appeal was filed and the matter was got remitted back to the High Court. However, the High Court again decided in favour of the landowners. Before the High Court, the government had not been able to support the acquisition, resultantly, the notification was quashed. In HPCL's case there had been complete non
application of mind, the State had been unable to produce the record of the acquisition. Therefore, under these circumstances the Supreme Court held as under:-

The Court in a case, where there has been total noncompliance
or substantial non-compliance with the provisions of Section 5-A of the Act, cannot fold its hands and refuse to grant a relief to the writ petitioner. When the decision-making process itself is in question, the power of judicial review can be exercised by the court in the event the order impugned suffers from well-known principles viz illegality, irrationality and procedural impropriety. Moreover, when a statutory authority exercises such enormous power it must be done in a fair and reasonable manner.

HPCL' s case has clearly laid down the modalities for hearing
objections. It is easy to see why the petitioners are objecting to the acquisition. There was a thriving farm and an orchard on the property. The petitioners had their house, their fore-fathers' samadi and a temple on the land. But on the other hand, there was a great need to develop Jhajjar in a planned and systematic way by acquiring large swathes of agricultural land and developing it in a planned manner before it got consumed by haphazard and unplanned expansion of Jhajjar. Release of the petitioners' farm from acquisition would have resulted in similarly situated persons also asking for release of their lands and the entire scheme or development of the area as commercial and residential area would have collapsed. It is an unfortunate aspect of the development that farmers have to lose their land for the growth of cities and towns and also occasionally for setting up factories.

This is a very big question which is faced by State Governments in India but we need not delve into it in this case.

1 kanal of petitioners' land has been released from acquisition,
obviously because their house exists on this particular parcel of land . The petitioners' lost their entire orchard and a large part of the land attached to their house which was covered by Smriti Sthal, temple, cattle sheds etc.

The petitioners cannot complain that they have been discriminated because the site plan of Jhajjar (Annexure P10/A) reveals that farms of many other landowners had been acquired but houses had been released from acquisition. The Collector's reports are Annexures P/22, P/23 and P/23A.

Annexure P/22 shows that there were at least 110 built-up properties in the acquired land. The field number, covered area, total area, class of construction, present use and sketch of each property has been given in Annexure P/22. The petitioners' property is entered at serial 24. It consisted of field 22 (covered area 2024 square feet, total area 69696 square feet, class of construction 'A' present use-residence). Field 26 has covered
area of 2700 square feet, class of construction 'B' and it was used as Mandir/well. Field 20 has covered area of 300 square feet of 'C' class construction used as a shed. Field 19 has covered area of 100 square feet used as a Samadi. What is interesting is that the Samadi is in one corner of the property. If the Samadi is released from acquisition, a large chunk of open acquired land would also got released, therefore, it is obvious why the samadi was included in the acquisition. Similarly cattle shed etc. was also included in the acquisition. Only the area of the kothi and the temple was recommended for release and with regard to the remaining the Government was asked to take the decision. Report regarding petitioners' property is at Annexure P/23. It is obvious that on the basis of this report the petitioners'
residential house has been released from acquisition. The action of the respondents was on the basis of petitioners' objection and spot inspection, which was carried out in their presence.

We are convinced that the petitioners received a proper hearing
before their objections were decided. The guidelines laid down in HPCL's case were not dis-regarded. The petitioners were present when the spot was inspected and were able to point out the exact location of the various structures on the acquired land.

The Collector had also been able to himself examine the structures in detail before submitting his report. Therefore, we
find that the procedure prescribed by the Act was followed and the petitioners were heard regarding their objections. We find no merits in this petition. Dismissed.

(K.S. GAREWAL)
JUDGE

(AJAI LAMBA)
JUDGE


H R SONI Versus MDU ROHTAK CR 2984 of 2005
Friday, 15th December, 2006
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Date of Decision: 15.12.2006

H.R.Soni …Petitioner
Vs.
Maharishi Dayanand University, Rohtak …Respondent

CORAM
Hon'ble Mr.Justice Vinod K.Sharma

Present:
Mr.Sandeep Kotla, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr.Pankaj Sharma, Advocate, for the respondent.

Vinod K.Sharma, J. (Oral)
Present revision petition has been filed against the orders passed by the learned Courts below rejecting an application moved by the petitioner under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short the Code) .

By way of interim injunction application the petitioner herein has sought an order restraining the respondent from recovering the amount of Rs.54,023.90P in view of the letter No.EN-3/02/M-3/53 dated 2.1.2003 till the decision of the suit. The primary ground taken by the petitioner in support of his application was that before issuing the letter of recovery no notice was issued to the petitioner herein and even otherwise it was a nonspeaking order. The petitioner had submitted reply to the said letter and thereafter the order recovering the amount in question was passed.

Learned both the courts below rejected the application primarily on the ground that the legality of order passed by the competent
authority and submissions made by the petitioner against the said order would only be considered after the parties are permitted to lead evidence, and therefore, at present the petitioner did not have a prima facie case nor the balance of convenience is in his favour. It was also held that no irreparable loss or injury would be caused to the petitioner in case the injunction was not granted. In appeal the learned Additional District Judge affirmed the order passed by the learned Trial Court.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that some of the similarly situated persons against whom similar show cause notice was
issued and thereafter an order was passed had come to this Court to challenge this order by filing a writ petition in which following order was passed:-

“ The petitioner has impugned the order dated January 2,2003( Annexure P/11) whereby the recovery of Rs.54,023/- has been ordered from him. A further prayer has been made by the petitioner that the respondents be directed to refund the amount already recovered from him in pursuance of the aforesaid order Annexure P/11.

Although various grounds of challenge have been made by the petitioner to the aforesaid order Annexure P/11 but primary, at this stage, we find that the order Annexure P/11 is a non-speaking order. In fact, a show notice had been issued to the petitioner for ordering the recovery of the excess payment. The petitioner had submitted a detailed reply
dated January 22, 2002 to the said show cause notice.

The University has, thereafter, passed the order Annexure P/11 ordering the recovery in question. From the perusal of the order Annexure P/11 we find that the reply of the petitioner has not been taken into consideration. No reasons have been ascribed as to why the aforesaid amount was liable to be recovered from him.

In these circumstances without going into the merits of the controversy at all, at this stage,we deem it appropriate to quash the order Annexure P/11 and direct respondent-
University to consider the reply filed by the petitioner to the show cause notice dated March 13, 2001 and, thereafter, pass a speaking order, by affording the petitioner an opportunity of hearing in the matter. In case fresh order adversely affects the interest of the petitioner, he would be at liberty to challenge the aforesaid order, by taking up all pleas which are available to him in accordance with law.

The writ petition stands disposed of.”

The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that in view of the decision of this Court the petitioner has a prima facie case and the impugned order cannot be sustained as the order challenged in civil suit is prima facie bad in law as the same is not speaking order and is in violation of the principles of natural justice.

In view of above and the order passed by this Court in CWP No.6624 of 2005, this revision petition is allowed. The impugned order is set aside and the application moved by the petitioner under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of the Code is allowed.

However, nothing stated herein should be taken as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.

(Vinod K.Sharma)
Judge


JITENDER BHATIA and ANR Versus M D UNIVERSITY and ANR CR1240 of 2004
Monday, 4th December, 2006
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

Date of Decision : December 04, 2006.

Jitender Bhatia and another ….. Petitioners
Vs.
M.D.University, Rohtak and another ….. Respondents

Coram : Hon'ble Mr.Justice P.S.Patwalia

Present : Mr.Rakesh Nehra, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr.R.S.Tacoria, Advocate for the respondents.

P.S.Patwalia, J. (Oral) :
On 31.07.2006 I had passed the following order :-

“Learned counsel for the petitioner has pointed out that by now the suit filed by him has been decreed. The University has been directed to declare the result of B.Pharmacy of 3rd year.

Learned counsel points out that he has also taken 4th year examination under the orders of this Court in the present revision petition. He further states that there would be no impediment with the University in declaring the result of 4th year.

Mr.Bhupinder Singh, learned counsel
appearing for Mr.Ahlawat states that he is
appearing today for the very first time as
Mr.Ahlawat is unwell and has not been coming to Court for some time.

Since the matter relates to declaration of result I consider it expedient to issue fresh dasti notice to the University. Let the University now be served for 18.8.2006.

Process dasti only. A copy of this order be also served upon the University along
with the notice.”

Learned counsel for the petitioners states that his result of B.Pharmacy, Part IV examination has been declared as R/L (lower).

Mr.Tacoria, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-University states that this has been done on account of the fact that the petitioners have a reappear in two subjects of the 3rd year examination out of total of eight subjects.

Learned counsel for the petitioners has drawn my attention to the ordinances governing the B.Pharmacy examination. The relevant extract of the ordinances is as hereunder :-

“For promotion from Part III to Part IV, a
student shall be required to clear all the subjects of Part I and Part II examinations OR 50% subjects of each Part I and Part II and Part III examinations OR 2/3 of the subjects of Part I, Part II and Part III taken together.

Provided that a candidate shall not be allowed to attend the next higher class unless he has fulfilled the above requirements.”

He submits that the petitioners have already cleared all subjects of Part I and Part II examination. He also fulfills the other alternative requirements and hence his result of 4th year should also be cleared. This would enable him to take any re-appear examination which he may have in the 4th year as well.

In view of the aforementioned regulations I am of the opinion that the University should be directed to declare the result of 4th year as well within 10 days of receipt of certified copy of this order. Needless to mention that if the petitioners have any re-appear in the 4th year they would be permitted to take the same in terms of the ordinances of the University.

With the aforesaid observations the present revision petition stands disposed of.

( P.S.Patwalia )
Judge


PARVEEN MALIK AND ORS Versus M D UNIVERSITY AND ORS CWP 17938 of 2006
Tuesday, 14th November, 2006
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

Date of Decision: November 14, 2006

Parveen Malik and others …..Petitioners
Vs.
M.D. University, Rohtak and others
…..Respondents

CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR.
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.S. BEDI.

Present:-
Mr. Surender Lamba, Advocate, for the petitioners.

JUDGMENT
Learned counsel for the petitioners requests for withdrawal of the petition with liberty to avail any other remedy in accordance with law.

Dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as aforementioned.

(M.M.KUMAR)
JUDGE

(M.M.S.BEDI)
JUDGE


SANSKRITI SCHOOL SIKSHA SAMITI Versus STATE OF HRY AND ORS CWP 15529 of 2006
Thursday, 19th October, 2006
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

DATE OF DECISION: October 19, 2006

Sanskriti School Siksha Samiti ….Petitioner
VERSUS
State of Haryana and others …..Respondents

CORAM:-
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VINEY MITTAL
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S. BHALLA

PRESENT:
Shri Aman Chaudhary, Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri Ajai Gulati, AAG, Haryana for respondent No.1.
Shri Balram K. Gupta, Senior Advocate with
Shri Shireesh Gupta, Advocate for respondent No.2.
Shri Vinod S. Bhardwaj, Advocate for respondent
No.3.

Viney Mittal,J.(Oral).
Written statement on behalf of respondent No.1 has
been filed in Court today. The same is taken on record. A copy thereof has been supplied to the learned counsel for the petitioner.

Shri Balram K. Gupta, the learned senior counsel
appearing for the respondent University, on instructions, has informed the Court that an inspection of the infrastructure possessed by the petitioner Samiti has been carried out by an inspection team of
Maharashi Dayanand University and the infrastructure possessed by the petitioner Samiti has been found in order. In these circumstances Maharashi Dayanand University has decided to grant a provisional affiliation to the petitioner Samiti to run a B.Ed college for the
academic session 2006-07.

In view of the statement made on behalf of the respondent University, the learned counsel for the petitioner states that the present petition has been rendered infructuous and be disposed of accordingly.

In view of the aforesaid stand taken by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, the present petition is disposed of as having been rendered infructuous.

A copy of the order be given dasti under the signatures of Special Secretary attached with this Court.

(Viney Mittal)
Judge

(H.S. Bhalla)
Judge


HARI OM SHAKTI CHARITABLE TRUST Versus STATE OF HRY AND ORS CWP 16017 of 2006
Thursday, 19th October, 2006
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

DATE OF DECISION: October 19, 2006

Hari Om Shakti Charitable Trust ….Petitioner
VERSUS
State of Haryana and others …..Respondents

CORAM:-
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE VINEY MITTAL
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S. BHALLA

PRESENT:
Shri Aman Chaudhary, Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri Ajai Gulati, AAG, Haryana for respondent No.1.
Shri Balram K. Gupta, Senior Advocate with
Shri Shireesh Gupta, Advocate for respondent No.2.
Shri Vinod S. Bhardwaj, Advocate for respondent
No.3.

Viney Mittal,J.(Oral).
Written statement on behalf of respondent No.1 has
been filed in Court today. The same is taken on record. A copy thereof has been supplied to the learned counsel for the petitioner.

Shri Balram K. Gupta, the learned senior counsel
appearing for the respondent University, on instructions, has informed the Court that an inspection of the infrastructure possessed by the petitioner Trust has been carried out by an inspection team of Maharashi Dayanand University and the infrastructure possessed by the petitioner Trust has been found in order. In these circumstances Maharashi Dayanand University has decided to grant a provisional affiliation to the petitioner Trust to run a B.Ed college for the
academic session 2006-07.

In view of the statement made on behalf of the respondent University, the learned counsel for the petitioner states that the present petition has been rendered infructuous and be disposed of accordingly.

In view of the aforesaid stand taken by the learned
counsel for the petitioner, the present petition is disposed of as having been rendered infructuous.

A copy of the order be given dasti under the signatures of Special Secretary attached with this Court.

(Viney Mittal)
Judge

(H.S. Bhalla)
Judge


RAKESH KUMAR Vs M D UNIVERSITY AND ORS CWP 15788 of 2006
Thursday, 28th September, 2006
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB and HARYANA, CHANDIGARH

Date of decision September 28, 2006

Rakesh Kumar …….Petitioner
Versus
M.D. University, Rohtak and others ……..Respondents

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINEY MITTAL AND
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S.BHALLA

Present:-
Sh.Suman Jain, Advocate for the petitioner.

Viney Mittal, J (Oral)
After arguing the case for some time, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, on instructions from the petitioner, who is present in the Court, wishes to withdraw the present petition with liberty to the petitioner to take other appropriate remedies in accordance with law.

Dismissed as withdrawn with liberty as aforesaid.

(VINEY MITTAL)
JUDGE

(H.S.BHALLA)
JUDGE


ASHOK MALIK Vs MAHARISHI DAYANAND UNIVERSITY ROHTAK RSA 2727 of 2005
Tuesday, 26th September, 2006
RSA No. 2727 of 2005 (Page numbers)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH

Date of Decision: 26.9.2006

Ashok Malik …Appellant
Versus
Maharishi Dayanand University Rohtak and others ….Respondents

Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Hemant Gupta.

Present:
Shri Rameshwar Malik, Advocate, for the appellant.

JUDGMENT
The plaintiff is in second appeal aggrieved against the judgment and decree passed by the Courts below, whereby his suit for
mandatory injunction directing the University to issue degree of graduation, was dismissed.

The plaintiff has appeared in BA Part-III examination of the
defendant-University in April, 1993, as a regular student. The plaintiff was placed in compartment i.e. re-appear in English and Economics. The plaintiff applied for re-evaluation and on re-evaluation, it is the case of the plaintiff that he was declared pass and detailed marks card (DMC) dated 27.12.1993, was received by the plaintiff from the University by post.

Thereafter, the plaintiff has done LLB Course from a College at
Hanumangarh. The plaintiff earlier appeared for MA previous examination with the defendant-University in the year 1994. Since the plaintiff required graduation degree for obtaining a licence to practice as an Advocate, he applied for the degree but the degree was not issued as his detailed marks certificate was found to be a forged one.

In the written statement, it was pointed out that the detailed marks certificate is not as per the University record and the same is forged one and obtained fraudulently. It was found that the result of re-evaluation was declared without any change. On 28.8.1997, the plaintiff approached the defendant to inquire about his MA degree and it was found that the plaintiff has got compartment in English and Economics. The plaintiff was asked to produce his detailed marks certificate and when produced, it was found that such certificate has been fraudulently managed by the plaintiff.

During the course of trial, the University has produced the entire record in respect of the result of the plaintiff which is to the effect that he has not passed out BA Part-III examination in the subjects of English and Economics and therefore, the detailed marks certificate to the effect that he has passed any such examination is clearly contrary to the record.

Learned counsel for the appellant has vehemently argued that
the inquiry was conducted by the University at the back of the plaintiff and any such inquiry is violative of the principles of natural justice. Had the plaintiff been associated, he would have explained that such DMC was issued genuinely. However, the said argument did not find favour with the Courts below, in as much as, it has been that as per the oral and documentary evidence produced on record, the detailed marks card Exhibit
D.4, does not tally with the original record and therefore, said certificate cannot form basis for issuance of the degree to the appellant.

In support of his contentions, learned counsel for the appellant
has referred to Sanatan Gauda v. Berhampur University and others AIR 1990 SC 1075, M.J.P. Rohilkhand University Bareilly v. Harjendar Singh and another AIR 2001 Allahabad 192 and Suresh Chandra Choudhury v. The Behrampur University and others AIR 1987 Orissa

38. However, the said judgments are not applicable in the facts of the present case. In the present case, it has been found as a matter of fact that DMC was not issued by the University. The original record produced by the University shows that the petitioner has got re-appear in English and Economics, whereas the DMC on the basis of which the appellant has claimed degree is not in terms of the records of the University.

Since the DMC, the very basis of the suit is not in terms of the records of the University, no order could have been passed by the Courts below so as to issue degree to the plaintiff to the effect that he has passed out graduation from the University.

Once the record has been produced before the Civil Court to prove that the DMC is forged, it cannot be said that the plaintiff
was entitled to any opportunity of hearing. It is the plaintiff who has sought degree on the basis of DMC, which has not been found to be genuine.

Therefore, the plaintiff cannot claim any relief on the basis of such DMC.

Concurrent findings of fact have been sought to be disputed by
re-appreciation of evidence. Such findings cannot be said to be suffering from any patent illegality or irregularity, which may raise any substantial question of law in the present second appeal.

Hence, the present appeal is dismissed.

(Hemant Gupta)
Judge


HARISH KUMAR RAWAT Vs MAHARISHI DAYANAND UNIV and ORS CWP 2792 of 2005
Monday, 25th September, 2006
In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Date of Decision: September 25, 2006

Harish Kumar Rawat …Petitioner
Versus
Maharshi Dayanand University and others …Respondents

CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.S. BEDI

PRESENT:
Mr. J.S. Dahiya, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. Pankaj Sharma, Advocate, for respondent No. 1.
Mr. Sudhanshu Makkar, Advocate, for respondent No. 2.
Mr. Harish Rathee, Sr. DAG, Haryana, for respondent No. 3.

JUDGMENT
M.M. KUMAR, J. (Oral) The petitioner has filed the instant petition under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging the practice adopted by the respondents in limiting the appointment for about 8 months. A further prayer has been made to direct the respondents to allow the CWP No. 2792 of 2005
petitioner to continue till regular appointments are made in
accordance with law. It has further been prayed that salary and
allowances, which are being paid to the regular employees, be also paid to the petitioner from the date of his initial appointment.

Having perused the record and hearing learned counsel for the parties, we are of the considered view that as far as the first prayer of the petitioner is concerned, no such directions could now be issued in view of the Constitution Bench judgment of Hon’ble the Supreme Court in the case of Secretary, State of Karnataka and others v. Umadevi and others, (2006) 4 SCC 1 as well as a detailed judgment of this Court in the case of Rajinder Kumar v. State of Haryana, 2006 (2) PLR 474. Therefore, the instant petition, in so far as, it seeks issuance of direction to the respondents to allow the petitioner to continue till the regular appointments are made, is dismissed.

Having dismissed the petition to the above extent, we take notice of the fact that the respondents have been filling up posts on ad hoc basis for the last over 6-7 years, which would amply highlight that work of the post exists. The petitioner has been paid salary for less than those who are regularly appointed although he might be discharging similar or same duties.

Therefore, we are inclined to issue direction in accordance with the view taken by the Constitution Bench of Hon’ble the Supreme Court in Umadevi’s case (supra). In para 55 of Umadevi’s case (supra) a limited relief has been given to the petitioner. Firstly, it has been held that the daily wage employees shall be given the minimum of the pay scale and secondly if sanctioned posts are vacant, the State was to take immediate steps for filling up those posts by a regular process of selection and those who are working on daily wages were to be granted permission to compete by waiving the age restriction imposed
for the recruitment. It has further been held that some weightage for their having been engaged for work in the Department for a
significant period of time was to be granted. Para 55 of the judgment in Umadevi’s case (supra) reads as under:-

“ 55. In cases relating to service in the Commercial Taxes Department, the High Court has directed that those engaged on daily wages, be paid wages equal to the salary and allowances that are being paid to the regular employees of their cadre in
government service, with effect from the dates from which they were respectively appointed. The objection taken was to the direction for payment from the dates of engagement. We find that the High Court had clearly gone wrong in directing that these employees be paid salary equal to the salary and allowances that are being paid to the regular employees of their cadre in government service, with effect from the dates from
which they were respectively engaged or appointed. It was not open to the High Court to impose such an obligation on the State when the very question before the High Court in the case was whether these employees were entitled to have equal pay for equal work so called and were entitled to any other benefit. They had also been engaged in the teeth of directions not to do so.

We are, therefore, of the view that, at best, the Division Bench of the High Court should have directed that wages equal to the salary that is being paid to regular employees be paid to these daily-wage employees with effect from the date of its judgment. Hence, that part of the direction of the Division Bench is modified and it is directed that these daily-wage earners be paid wages
equal to the salary at the lowest grade of employees of their cadre in the Commercial Taxes Department in government service, from the date of the judgment of the Division Bench of the High Court. Since, they are only daily-wage earners, there would be no question of other allowances being paid to them. In view of our conclusion, that the courts are not expected to issue
directions for making such persons permanent in service, we set aside that part of the direction of the High Court directing the Government to consider their cases for regularisation. We also notice that the High Court has not adverted to the aspect as to whether it was regularisation or it was giving permanency that was being directed by the High Court. In such a situation, the
direction in that regard will stand deleted and the appeals
filed by the State would stand allowed to that extent. If
sanctioned posts are vacant (they are said to be vacant)
the State will take immediate steps for filling those posts by a regular process of selection. But when regular recruitment is undertaken, the respondents in CAs Nos. 3595-612 and those in the Commercial Taxes Department similarly situated, will be allowed to compete, waiving the age restriction imposed for the
recruitment and giving some weightage for their having been engaged for work in the Department for a significant period of time. That would be the extent of the exercise of power by this Court Article 142 of the Constitution to do justice to them.”

In view of the aforementioned view expressed by Hon’ble the Supreme Court, we direct the respondents to grant to the
petitioner minimum of the pay scale given to the regular employees of his cadre. The petitioner is held entitled to arrears for three years two months (38 months) preceding the date of filing the petition.

We further hold that if sanctioned posts are lying vacant, the respondents shall take immediate steps for filling up those posts
by a regular process of selection in accordance with the rules and law.

In case the petitioner fulfil all other qualifications of the rules, he
should also be permitted to compete, waiving the age restriction
imposed for the recruitment and grant him some weightage in lieu of number of years of service rendered by him. The needful shall be done within a period of four months from the date a certified copy of this order is supplied to the respondents.

The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms.

(M.M. KUMAR)
JUDGE

(M.M.S. BEDI)
JUDGE


VIVEK SINGH Vs M D UNIVERSITY AND ORS CWP 3805 of 2005
Monday, 25th September, 2006
In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Date of Decision: September 25, 2006

Vivek Singh …Petitioner
Versus
Maharshi Dayanand University and others …Respondents

CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.S. BEDI

PRESENT:
Mr. J.S. Dahiya, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. Rajinder Goel, Advocate, for respondent No. 2.
Mr. Harish Rathee, Sr. DAG, Haryana, for respondent No. 3.

JUDGMENT
M.M. KUMAR, J. (Oral)
The petitioner has filed the instant petition under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging the practice adopted by the respondents in limiting the appointment for a fixed period. A further prayer has been made to direct the respondents to allow the petitioner to continue till regular appointments are made in accordance with law. It has further been prayed that salary and allowances, which are being paid to the regular employees, be also paid to the petitioner from the date of his initial appointment.

Having perused the record and hearing learned counsel for the parties, we are of the considered view that as far as the first
prayer of the petitioner is concerned, no such directions could now be issued in view of the Constitution Bench judgment of Hon’ble the Supreme Court in the case of Secretary, State of Karnataka v.

Umadevi, (2006) 4 SCC 1 as well as a detailed judgment of this
Court in the case of Rajinder Kumar v. State of Haryana, 2006 (2) PLR 474. Therefore, the instant petition, in so far as, it seeks
issuance of direction to the respondents to allow the petitioner to
continue till the regular appointments are made, is dismissed.

Having dismissed the petition to the above extent, we take notice of the fact that the respondents have been filling up posts on ad hoc basis for the last over 6-7 years, which would amply highlight that work of the post exists. The petitioner has been paid salary for less than those who are regularly appointed although he might be discharging similar or same duties.

Therefore, we are inclined to issue direction in accordance with the view taken by the Constitution Bench of Hon’ble the Supreme Court in Umadevi’s case (supra). In para 55 of Umadevi’s case (supra) a limited relief has been given to the petitioner. Firstly, it has been held that the daily wage employees shall be given the minimum of the pay scale and secondly if sanctioned posts are vacant, the State was to take immediate steps for filling up those posts by a regular process of selection and those who are working on daily wages were to be granted permission to compete by waiving the age restriction imposed
for the recruitment. It has further been held that some weightage for their having been engaged for work in the Department for a
significant period of time was to be granted. Para 55 of the judgment in Umadevi’s case (supra) reads as under:-

“ 55. In cases relating to service in the Commercial Taxes Department, the High Court has directed that those engaged on daily wages, be paid wages equal to the salary and allowances that are being paid to the regular employees of their cadre in
government service, with effect from the dates from which they were respectively appointed. The objection taken was to the direction for payment from the dates of engagement. We find that the High Court had clearly gone wrong in directing that these employees be paid salary equal to the salary and allowances that are being paid to the regular employees of their cadre in government service, with effect from the dates from
which they were respectively engaged or appointed. It was not open to the High Court to impose such an obligation on the State when the very question before the High Court in the case was whether these employees were entitled to have equal pay for equal work so called and were entitled to any other benefit. They had also been engaged in the teeth of directions not to do so.

We are, therefore, of the view that, at best, the Division Bench of the High Court should have directed that wages equal to the salary that is being paid to regular employees be paid to these daily-wage employees with effect from the date of its judgment. Hence, that part of the direction of the Division Bench is modified and it is directed that these daily-wage earners be paid wages
equal to the salary at the lowest grade of employees of their cadre in the Commercial Taxes Department in government service, from the date of the judgment of the Division Bench of the High Court.

Since, they are only daily-wage earners, there would be no question of other allowances being paid to them. In view of our conclusion, that the courts are not expected to issue directions for making such persons permanent in service, we set aside that part of the direction of the High Court directing the Government to consider their cases for regularisation. We also notice that the High Court has not adverted to the aspect as to whether it was regularisation or it was giving permanency that was being directed by the High Court. In such a situation, the direction in that regard will stand deleted and the appeals filed by the State would stand allowed to that extent. If sanctioned posts are vacant (they are said to be vacant) the State will take immediate steps for filling those posts by a regular process of selection. But when regular recruitment is undertaken, the respondents in CAs Nos. 3595-612 and those in the Commercial Taxes Department similarly situated, will be allowed to compete, waiving the age restriction imposed for the recruitment and giving some weightage for their having been engaged for work in the Department for a significant period of time. That would be the extent of the exercise of power by this Court Article 142 of the
Constitution to do justice to them.”

(emphasis added)
In view of the aforementioned view expressed by Hon’ble the Supreme Court, we direct the respondents to grant to the petitioner minimum of the pay scale given to the regular employees of his cadre. The petitioner is held entitled to arrears for three years two months (38 months) preceding the date of filing the petition.

We further hold that if sanctioned posts are lying vacant, the respondents shall take immediate steps for filling up those posts
by a regular process of selection in accordance with the rules and law.

In case the petitioner fulfil all other qualifications of the rules, he
should also be permitted to compete, waiving the age restriction
imposed for the recruitment and grant him some weightage in lieu of number of years of service rendered by him. The needful shall be done within a period of four months from the date a certified copy of this order is supplied to the respondents.

The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms.

(M.M. KUMAR)
JUDGE

(M.M.S. BEDI)
JUDGE


R P GARG Vs MAHARSHI DAYANAND UNIVESITY AND ANR CWP 15117 of 2006
Thursday, 21st September, 2006
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

Date of Decision: September 21, 2006

R.P. Garg …..Petitioner
Vs.
Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak and another
…..Respondents

CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR.
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.S. BEDI.

Present:- Mr. Jagbir Malik, Advocate for the petitioner.

M.M. KUMAR, J. (ORAL)
The instant petition is directed against the order of transfer of the petitioner from University College, Rohtak to Post Graduate Regional Centre, Rewari, on the post of Lecturer in Physical Education. The grievance of the petitioner is that there is no infrastructure for discharging the duties by the petitioner of the post of Lecturer in Physical Education at Rewari. Earlier also, such grievance was made and the petitioner was allowed to continue at University College, Rohtak. Another grievance made by the
petitioner is that his wife is posted at Rohtak and being a couple case, he should be allowed to continue at Rohtak. In the facts and circumstances of the case, we deem it just and appropriate to relegate to the petitioner to the remedy of filing a representation against the impugned order dated September 13, 2006 (P-19) bringing to the notice of the respondents various violations of the policy, lack of infrastructure and request for adjustment at Rohtak on account of
being a couple case. The petitioner may file a representation within a period of two weeks under Registered A.D. Cover to the respondents by brining to their notice all the aforementioned grievances. If such a representation is made then the respondents shall take cognizance of the same by passing a speaking order in accordance with law within in a period
of four weeks thereafter.

Petition stands disposed of in the above terms.

(M.M.KUMAR)
JUDGE

(M.M.S.BEDI)
JUDGE


KAMAL SINGH Vs. MAHARISHI DAYANAND UNIVERSITY, ROHTAK AND OTHERS CWP 13602 of 2009

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Date of decision : 7.3.2011

Kamal Singh ….Petitioner
Versus
Maharishi Dayanand University, Rohtak and others …Respondents

CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER

Present: Mr.Vivek Khatri, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr.Anurag Goyal, Advocate for the respondents.

MAHESH GROVER, J.
This petition has been filed by the petitioner with the prayer to declare the action of the respondent University in debarring him from appearing in any University examinations for a period of three years as contrary to the provisions of the Ordinance of the University.

The petitioner is a student of LL.B.Final Year in a course which is of a duration of five years. He was to take the examination of the final year on 5.4.2008. His case is that on 3.4.2008 he suffered an injury in an accident as a result of which his right hand was fractured and he needed the help of a scribe to answer the question papers. The help of the scribe was given to him and on 5.4.2008 he with the assistance of the scribe answered his examination.

Thereafter in the subsequent examinations which followed on 10.4.2008
onwards he did not use the assistance of the scribe and answered the
question papers himself.

The University, on the other hand, found out that the petitioner had in fact committed a fraud as he was never injured and he forged the signatures of the Head of the Department of Laws on the photograph which was appearing on the authority letter of the scribe which was afforded to him. According to the University, the petitioner admitted his lapse and pleaded forgiveness. The University then prepared an unfair means case against the petitioner in accordance with the terms of ordinance governing the punishment for use of unfair means and in pursuance of clause 4 (k) (iii) (iv) (v) and (m) inflicted the punishment which is contemplated in clause 8 (i)
(ii). The relevant clauses are extracted hereunder :-

4. Use of unfair means shall include the following :

a) to j) ……………………. k) Making deliberate arrangement to cheat in the
examination, such as :- i) and ii) ………… iii) Impersonation.
iv) Obtaining admission to the examination on a false representation.
v) Forging another Person's signature. vi) and vi) ……….

l) …………… m) Any other act of unfair-means/misconduct not covered in these provisions.

Learned counsel for the petitioner while making grievance of the punishment inflicted upon the petitioner has contended that the entire action against the petitioner is borne out of mala fides. He contends that even a perusal of the ordinance does not support the case of the respondents and he has been unnecessarily victimised. He contends that the punishment awarded to him is unsustainable as it is based on no material. He further contends that the letter placed by the University on the record does not bear his signatures and is thus a concoction.

Similarly, the plea of the University that the OPD record of the hospital i.e. PGIMS, Rohtak, is forged, is without any substance. He thus contends that the action of the University is arbitrary and the impugned order deserves to be set aside.

Learned counsel for the respondent University has referred to paragraph 5 of the written statement wherein they have stated that the information was obtained from the PGIMS, Rohtak from where it has been concluded that the petitioner was never injured in accident and his plea that he had suffered a fracture on 3.4.2008 is without any basis as he took the examination with the help of scribe only in the first paper which was held on 5.4.2008 and thereafter since 10.4.2008 he did not use the scribe in the remaining subsequent papers indicating thereby that the petitioner never suffered any fracture. They have also referred to the fact that the
petitioner had admitted his lapse before the officials of the University and had pleaded forgiveness which was indicative of his complicity in the use of unfair means while attempting the examination.

Learned counsel for the petitioner then went on to deny the document Annexure P-5 (R1/1) which has been relied upon by the respondents as a measure of the acceptance by the petitioner.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the material on record.

This Court on 12.7.2010 had expressed its opinion that it was not inclined to interfere in the impugned order except to the extent that the punishment may appear to be harsh considering the nature of allegation made against the petitioner and granted time to the University to seek instructions to enable them to have instructions if the punishment imposed could be lessened in any manner. On 19.7.2010, learned counsel for the University very fairly stated that they were ready to permit the petitioner to appear in the December examination. The offer was not acceptable to the learned counsel for the petitioner, who stated that he would argue the case on merits.

Accordingly, this Court proceeded to determine the case on merits.

Prima facie, it appears that the petitioner has used an ingenuine method to adopt unfair means in examination. He cooked up a story about meeting with an accident and suffering a fracture on the right hand. It is not conceivable that a person who suffered a fracture, would just seven days after be fit enough to take the examination by appearing without a plaster and without a scribe.

Besides, the petitioner apparently has admitted to his guilt which is evident from Annexure P-5 (R-1/1). The petitioner, however, denies the existence of this document. The Court under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India has no means to determine as to whether such a document, which has been placed on record, is reflection of its genuineness or not. In the absence of this the Court is now left to examine as to whether the punishment awarded to the petitioner is excessive or was it in accordance with the provisions of the ordinance of the University or not. The charge against the petitioner is that he had made deliberate attempt to cheat in the examination, which is evident, as he had used the help of a scribe without there being any injury on his person. The signatures of the Chairman of the Lar Department were also forged.

The ordinance clearly takes care of such attempts made by a candidate to cheat in the examination and even though strictly the case of the petitioner may not fall within the clause of impersonation, but it certainly falls within the ambit of “obtaining admission to the examination on a false representation” and the remaining is taken care of clause 4(m) which refers to any act of unfair-means/misconduct not covered in the provisions. The scope of the ordinance is, therefore, wide enough to include any type of misconduct which a candidate may indulge in to obtain undue advantage to himself. That being so, there is no infirmity in the
approach of the respondents who have cancelled the examination of the petitioner and have debarred him to appear in the examination conducted by the University for three years. The Court could have considered the exceptional punishment of debarring the petitioner for a period of three years in the examination and in fact afforded the petitioner an opportunity, but unfortunately the petitioner did not accept the olive branch which was held out to him and insisted on questioning the punishment awarded to him. The tenure of the punishment expires in April, 2011. In December, 2010 the petitioner was given an opportunity to appear in the examination which he spurned. In this view of the matter, when the petition has been
answered in the month of March, 2011, even if the prayer of the petitioner debarring him for a period of three years is accepted by saying it is harsh, I am of the opinion that this prayer would now be rendered more or less infructuous as the petitioner would now be able to take the examination in April, 2011. In so far as the imposition of cancellation of the examination and the conduct of the unfair means by the petitioner is concerned, this Court finds no infirmity in the approach of the respondents and the same is also reflected in the order dated 12.7.2010. The petition is, therefore, dismissed.

Learned counsel appearing for the respondents has stated that the petitioner, if so desirous, can still appear in the examination to be conducted in April, 2011. In view of this statement, it is open to the petitioner to approach the University in the event of his being interested in taking the examination in April, 2011. In case he does so, the respondent-University shall abide by its statement and permit the petitioner to take the examination.

(MAHESH GROVER)
JUDGE


DR MANJU KUMAR Vs M D UNIVERSITY ROHTAK and OTHERS CWP 1620 of 2009
Thursday, 17th March, 2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

R.A. No.125 of 2010 in

DATE OF DECISION: March 17, 2011

DR. MANJU KUMARI …APPLICANT-PETITIONER
VERSUS
M.D. UNIVERSITY, ROHTAK and OTHERS …RESPONDENTS

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.KANNAN.

1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement? No

2. To be referred to the reporters or not? No

3. Whether the judgement should be reported in the digest? No

PRESENT:
MR. CHETAN MITTAL, SR. ADVOCATE WITH MR. NILESH BHARDWAJ, ADVOCATE FOR THE APPLICANT-PETITIONER.
MR. GURMINDER SINGH, ADVOCATE FOR MR. SIDDARTH BATRA, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.1.
NONE FOR RESPONDENTS NO.2 TO 8.
MR. R.K. MALIK, SR.ADVOCATE WITH MR. ANURAJ GOEL, ADVOCATE
AND MR. SAJJAN SINGH, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.4.

K.KANNAN, J.
1. The application has been filed for review of the decision rendered by this Court on 11.3.2010. The petitioner had origInally mounted a challenge to the selection of 9th respondent to the post of Lecturer in Hindi in respondent No.2-College. The selection had been made on the basis of marks assigned on various parameters already set down for the selection process. On an over-all consideration of the relative merits of the petitioner and the 9th respondent, it was found that against the initial award of 58 marks to the petitioner, she was entitled to additional 3 marks for her participation in NSS Programme, but at the same time it was found that she had been awarded 2 marks extra for teaching experience which ought not to have been given to her. It meant that the petitioner was entitled to be assigned 59 marks. On the other hand, considering the marks assigned to the 9th respondent accepting the contention of the 9th respondent that some marks which ought to have been granted for teaching experience, the impugned order assigned and that was taken favourably to assign 2 marks for her teaching experience which took her tally to 61 to 63.

2. Now the application has been filed by the petitioner stating that reduction of 2 marks made for the petitioner for teaching experience was erroneous and that even without a qualification in M.Phil, she had been already working in the same institute as a Teacher and therefore, the allotment of marks already made was justified. On the other hand, the contention of the petitioner was that 9th respondent did not have adequate teaching experience and therefore, she could not have been granted 2 marks in the manner done by the impugned order. The reasoning in the impugned order was that the assignment of 2 marks was on the basis of the directions issued by the Director, Distance Education vide his letter dated 18.3.2009 that converted DDE Teaching experience by working at P.G. Study Centre during the session 2001-02 for 81 hours and under the same centre for 120
hours totalling in 201 hours was equivalent to a teaching experience of 12 weeks and 9 hours. This was found to entitle her to be awarded 2 marks.

The attempt now was to show that 9th respondent was not teacher in any college and the working experience in Distance Education could not be treated as teaching experience, especially, because the 9th respondent was a regular student of M.Phil in 1996 and the result was declared in the year 1999. She was only M.A. prior to her admission in M.Phil in 1996-97, the NET being condition precedent for eligibility for a Lecturer and it was not relaxable in cases of those who had passed P.hD./M.Phil upto December 1992-93. Further the contention was that the Director who had issued such a certificate of teaching experience was not competent to issue such a certificate and that information was said to have been provided to her under the RTI Act.

3. I do not think that this case can be brought within the parameters of a patent error apparent to the record to subject the impugned order for a review. While taking the decision for awarding marks for a teaching through the Distance Education Programme, I have relied on the UGC norms issued by the Director, Distance Education vide his letter dated 18.3.2009. Any new information which the applicant-petitioner obtains through RTI to say that the Director did not have authority to issue experience certificate cannot be urged as a ground for review, since the issue is not whether the person that issued the certificate was competent to issue such certificate. The issue, however, was whether the teaching experience for certain number of hours in Distance Education Programme could obtain equivalence to a regular teaching experience. I have applied this equivalence on the basis of UGC norms issued by the Director, Distance Education, which according to the petitioner, was wrongly applied.

It is not an apparent error, but it was error of judicial reasoning. I have taken such a decision on a conscious application of mind and I do not find that the finding has to undergo fresh appraisal at my own instance. In my view, the order does not suffer from vice of patent error to be subjected to my own review.

4. The application for review is dismissed.

(K.KANNAN)
JUDGE


PANKAJ BALA Vs MAHARISHI DAYA NAND UNIVERSITY ROHTAK AND OTHERS CWP 8835 of 2010
Tuesday, 22nd March, 2011
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT, CHANDIGARH.

Date of decision: 22.03.2011.

Pankaj Bala ….Petitioners
Versus
Maharishi Daya Nand University, Rohtak and others. ….Respondents.

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER

Present:
Shri Abhishek Yadav, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Shri Anurag Goyal, Advocate, for respondent Nos. 1 and 2.
Shri Ajay Saini, Advocate, for respondent No.3.

Mahesh Grover, J (Oral)
The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking quashing of letter dated 20.4.2010 (Annxure P-6) vide which the candidature of the petitioner for admission in B.Ed Course for the academic Session 2009-2010 has been rejected by the Principal, Satish Public College of Education, Delhi Road, Rewari-respondent No.3. A further prayer has been made that the respondents be directed to restore the admission of the petitioner.

Notice of motion having been issued, the respondents have put in appearance and stated that the petitioner has already taken a recourse to the filing of the Civil Suit before the Civil Judge of competent Jurisdiction at Rewari.

In the Civil Suit, application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Procedure for issuance of injunction order was also moved which was declined by the Civil Judge on 11.5.2010. Thereafter, the petitioner on the very same day moved an application seeking withdrawal of the suit and the following order was passed by the learned Civil Judge:-

File taken up today on the application. An application for withdrawing the present suit has been
moved. Learned counsel for the plaintiff has made the statement to the effect that he does not want to proceed further with the present suit, in view of the statement made by learned counsel for plaintiff, present suit is dismissed as withdrawn. File be consigned to record room after due compliance.

Sd/- Suruchi Atreja Singh,
CJ (JD) Rewari 11.5.2010
A perusal of the averments made in the writ petition shows that the petitioner has cleverly concealed this material fact from this Court. It is also to be noticed that no leave from the learned Civil Judge was sought at the time of seeking withdrawal of the suit to avail other remedy which may be available to the petitioner. It is, thus, evident that the petitioner has tried to over-reach the Court. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Ramjas Foundation Vs. Union of India and others 2011(1) RCR (Civil) 176 has observed as under:-

The principle that a person who does not come to the Court with clean hands is not entitled to be heard on the merits of his grievance and, in any case, such person is not entitled to any relief is applicable not only to
the petitions filed under Articles 32, 226 and 136 of the Constitution but also to the cases instituted in others courts and judicial forums. The object underlying the principle is that every Court is not only entitled but is duty bound to protect itself from unscrupulous litigants who do not have any respect for truth and who try to pollute the stream of justice by resorting to falsehood or by making misstatement or by suppressing facts which have bearing on adjudication of the issue(s) arising in the case. In Dalglish v. Jarvie 2 Mac. and G. 231, 238, Lord Langdale and Rolfe B. observed:

It is the duty of a party asking for an injunction to bring under the notice of the Court all facts material to the
determination of his right to that injunction; and it is no excuse for him to say that he was not aware of the
importance of any fact which he has omitted to bring forward. In Castelli v. Cook (1849) 7 Hare, 89, 94 Wigram V.C. stated the rule in the following words: "A plaintiff applying ex parte comes under a contract with the Court that he will state the whole case fully and fairly to the Court. If he fails to do that, and the Court finds, when other party applies to dissolve the injunction, that any material fact has been suppressed or not property brought forward, the plaintiff is told the Court will not decide on the merits, and that, as he has broken faith with the Court, the injunction must go." In Republic of Peru v. Dreyfus Brothers and Company 55 L.T. 802, 803, Kay J. held as under:

I have always maintained, and I think it most important to maintain most strictly, the rule that, in ex parte applications to this Court, the utmost good faith must be observed. If there is an important misstatement, speaking for myself, I have never hesitated, and never shall hesitate until the rule is altered, to discharge the order at once, so as to impress upon all persons who are suitors in this Court the importance of dealing in good faith in the Court when ex parte applications are made.

The same rule was restated by Scrutton L., J in R. v. Kensington Income Tax Commissioner (1917) 1 K.B.
486. The facts of that case were that in April, 1916, the General Commissioners for the Purposes of the Income Tax Acts for the district of Kensington made an additional assessment upon the applicant for the year ending April 5, 1913, in respect of profits arising from foreign possessions. On May 16, 1916, the applicant obtained a rule nisi directed to the Commissioners calling upon them to show cause why a writ of prohibition should not be awarded to prohibit them from proceeding upon the assessment upon the ground that the applicant was not a subject of the King nor resident within the United Kingdom and had not been in the United Kingdom, except for temporary purposes, nor with any view or intent of establishing her residence therein, nor for a period equal to six months in any one year. In the affidavit on which the rule was obtained the applicant stated that she was a French subject and resident in France and was not and had not been a subject of the United Kingdom nor a resident in the United Kingdom; that during the year ending April 5, 1913, she was in the United Kingdom for temporary purposes on visits for sixty-eight days; that she spent about twenty of these days in London at her brother's house, 213, King's Road,Chelsea, generally in company with other guests of her brother; that she was also in the United Kingdom during the year ending April 5, 1914, for temporary purposes on visits, and spent part of the time at 213, King's Road aforesaid; and that since the month of November, 1914, she had not been in the United Kingdom. From the affidavits filed on behalf of the Commissioners and of the surveyor of taxes, who showed cause against the rule nisi, and from the affidavit of the applicant in reply, it appeared that in February, 1909, a leasehold house, 213, King's Road, Chelsea, had been taken in the name of the applicant's brother. The purchase-money for the lease of the house and the furniture amounted to 4000l., and this was paid by the applicant out of her own money.

The accounts of household expenses were paid by the brother and subsequently adjusted between him and the applicant. The Divisional Court without dealing with the merits of the case discharged the rule on the ground that the applicant had suppressed or misrepresented the facts material to her application. The Divisional Court observed that the Court, for its own protection is entitled to say "we refuse this writ of prohibition without going into the merits of the case on the ground of the conduct of the applicant in bringing the case before us". On appeal, Lord Cozens-Hardy M.R. And Warrington L.J. approved the view taken by the Divisional Court. Scrutton L.,J. who agreed that the appeal should be dismissed observed:

and it has been for many years the rule of the Court, and one which it is of the greatest importance to maintain, that when an applicant comes to the Court to obtain relief on an ex parte statement he should
make a full and fair disclosure of all the material facts – facts, not law. He must not misstate the law if he can
help it – the court is supposed to know the law. But it knows nothing about the facts, and the applicant must
state fully and fairly the facts, and the penalty by which the Court enforces that obligation is that if it finds out
that the facts have not been fully and fairly stated to it, the Court will set aside any action which it has taken
on the faith of the imperfect statement.

The above noted rules have been applied by this Court in large number of cases for declining relief to a
party whose conduct is blameworthy and who has not approached the Court with clean hands – Hari Narain v. Badri Das AIR 1963 SC 1558, Welcome Hotel v. State of A.P. (1983) 4 SCC 575, G. Narayanaswamy Reddy v. Government of Karnataka (1991) 3 SCC 261, S.P. Chengalvaraya Naidu v. Jagannath (1994) 1 SCC 1, A.V. Papayya Sastry v. Government of A.P. (2007) 4 SCC 221, Prestige Lights Limited v. SBI (2007) 8 SCC 449, Sunil Poddar v. Union Bank of India (2008) 2 SCC 326, K.D. Sharma v. SAIL (2008) 12 SCC 481, G. Jayashree v. Bhagwandas S. Patel (2009) 3 SCC 141 and Dalip Singh v. State of U.P. (2010) 2 SCC 114. In the last mentioned judgment, the Court lamented on the increase in the number of cases in which the parties have tried to misuse the process of Court by making false and/or misleading statements or by suppressing the relevant facts or by trying to mislead the Court in passing order in their favour and observed:

For many centuries Indian society cherished two basic values of life i.e. "satya" (truth) and "ahimsa" (non-violence). Mahavir, Gautam Buddha and Mahatma Gandhi guided the people to ingrain these values in their daily life.

Truth constituted an integral part of the justicedelivery system which was in vogue in the pre-
Independence era and the people used to feel proud to tell truth in the courts irrespective of the
consequences. However, post-Independence period has seen drastic changes in our value system. The materialism has overshadowed the old ethos and the quest for personal gain has become so intense that those involved in litigation do not hesitate to take shelter of falsehood, misrepresentation and suppression of facts in the court proceedings.

In the last 40 years, a new creed of litigants has cropped up. Those who belong to this creed do not have
any respect for truth. They shamelessly resort to falsehood and unethical means for achieving their goals. In order to meet the challenge posed by this new creed of litigants, the courts have, from time to time, evolved new rules and it is now well established that a litigant, who attempts to pollute the stream of justice or who touches the pure fountain of justice with tainted hands, is not entitled to any relief, interim or final.

Having regard to the aforesaid decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the instant writ petition is dismissed on the aforesaid ground of concealment of material facts from this Court without adverting to any other
controversy which has been raised in this writ petition.

(MAHESH GROVER)
JUDGE


R P GARG Vs MAHARSHI DAYANAND UNIVERSITY AND ANR CWP 19260 of 2006
Saturday, 5th December, 0206
In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Date of Decision: 05.12.2006

R.P. Garg …Petitioner
Versus
Maharshi Dayanand University and others
…Respondents

CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.S. BEDI

PRESENT:
Mr. Jagbir Malik, Advocate, for the petitioner.
JUDGMENT

M.M. KUMAR, J. (Oral)
The instant petition is directed against the order dated 13.9.2006 (P-32) transferring the petitioner from the office of Dean Student Welfare, Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak, to the Post Graduate Regional Centre, Rewari, from where he was deputed at Rohtak. The petitioner has filed a representation, which was not decided, leading to filing of before this Court, which was disposed of by us on 21.9.2006 with the direction to the respondents to consider the representation, if any, which was to be filed by the petitioner.

The representation has been considered and
rejected by order dated 13.11.2006 (P-38).

The issue that there was no infrastructure at Post Graduate Regional Centre, Rewari, for
discharging duties by the petitioner on the post of Lecturer in Physical Education has been rejected by observing that one post of Lecturer in Physical Education at Post Graduate Regional Centre, Rewari, was exclusively created for it. The petitioner was duly selected for that post and joined at the Post Graduate Regional Centre, Rewari. His earlier request to be posted at the University Teaching Department or University College, Rohtak, was rejected by the Vice-Chancellor on 14.11.1991 and, therefore, it has been concluded that the petitioner cannot claim posting at Rohtak as a matter of right although he was allowed to work at University Teaching Department, Rohtak, on transfer basis under peculiar circumstances on his own written request. However, the permission to work in those circumstances was not to vest any right in the petitioner to claim permanent posting at Rohtak. With regard to lack of infrastructural facilities, it has been stated that there were sufficient infrastructural facilities at the Post Graduate Regional Centre, Rewari and details have also been mentioned. The other grounds of being couple case and the decision of transfer against Government policy have also been rejected.

After perusing the detailed speaking order, dated 13.11.2006 (P-38) we find that there is no legal claim, which may be enforced by issuance of a writ of mandamus to the respondents directing them to transfer the petitioner at the University Teaching Department, Rohtak or in the University College, Rohtak as the petitioner has been engaged as a Lecturer for serving at the Post
Graduate Regional Centre, Rewari.

There is no merit in the petition. Dismissed.

(M.M. KUMAR)
JUDGE

(M.M.S. BEDI)
JUDGE


DEEPIKA RAGHAV Vs MAHARSHI DAYANAND UNIVERSITY AND OTHERS Civil Writ Petition 9778 of 2010
Monday, 20th December, 2010
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Deepika Raghav …Petitioner
Versus
Maharshi Dayanand University and others …Respondents

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH

Present:
Mr. Akshay Pratap, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Anil Malik, Advocate for respondents No. 2 and 3.
Mr. N.R. Dahia, Advocate for respondent No. 4.

RANJIT SINGH J.
Counsel says that the present writ petition is rendered infructuous and may be dismissed as such as the result has already been declared.

Dismissed as infructuous.

(RANJIT SINGH )
JUDGE


MAHARISHI DAYANAND UNIVERSITY ROHTAK Vs DEEPTI
Monday, 11th May, 2009
In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh

Civil Revision No. 239 of 2005 (O and M)

Date of decision: May 11, 2009

Maharishi Dayanand University, Rohtak .. Petitioner
Vs.
Deepti .. Respondent

Coram:
Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.N. Jindal

Present:
None.

A.N. Jindal, J
Case called several times since morning but none has appeared on behalf of the petitioner to assist the court. It appears that the petitioner is no more interested in pursuing the case.

Dismissed for want of prosecution.

(A.N. Jindal)
Judge


STATE OF HARYANA Vs RAJ BALA AND OTHERS LPA 2797 of 2001
Thursday, 7th May, 2009
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

Date of decision: 7.5.2009

State of Haryana. —– Appellant
Vs.
Raj Bala and others. —–Respondent

CORAM:-
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN

Present:-
Ms. Palika Monga, AAG, Haryana. for the appellant/State.
Mr. Rajesh Lamba, Advocate for the respondent.

ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J.:
1. This appeal has been preferred against judgment of learned Single Judge dated 10.1.2001. In the prayer, order dated 27.9.2000 (should be 2001), has also been mentioned.

2. The writ petition was filed by the widow of late L/Nk. Bhim Singh, who was serving in the Army. He joined the armed forces in the year 1988 and died on 2.7.1999 at Gulmarg post in Kargil sector during Operation Vijay. He was 33 years of age.

Alongwith the petition, certificate dated 3.7.1999 issued by Medical Officer, Regimental Medical Officer, High AltitudeLPA No.2797 of 2001 Welfare School, was filed as Annexure P-1. Cause of death was mentioned as forehead injuries. The widow received message of death from the SDM, Fatehabad. At the funeral, Home Minister of Haryana, Superintendent of Police, Deputy Commissioner and other senior officers of the district were present. The Chief Minister, Haryana also sent a condolence message. On
13.8.1999, a State level function was organised by Maharishi Dayanand University, Rohtak for honouring the widows of the martyrs, in which the petitioner was also honoured. The Governor presided over the function and the Chief Minister was the Chief Guest. A meeting was held in the Haryana Vidhan
Sabha on 27.7.1999, wherein a reference was also made to the sacrifices of the husband of the petitioner. However, ex-gratia payment, which was announced by the State, was not given to the widow, on account of which, she filed a writ petition. She also stated that she had three minor children aged 3, 5 and 7 years
and she had no source of income except pension. Though lip sympathy was shown to her, she was not given ex-gratia, which was declared by the State. Inspite of opportunity given, the State did not file its reply.

3. Learned Single Judge held that as per instructions dated 25.7.1999, the Haryana Government had announced exgratia payment of Rs.10 lacs which had not been paid without any valid reason.

Accordingly, the writ petition was allowed with a 2LPA No.2797 of 2001 direction to release payment of Rs.10 lacs i.e. Rs.5 lacs to the widow and Rs.5 lacs to the parents of the deceased. Thereafter, the State of Haryana filed a review petition on the ground that written statement could not be filed.

4. Learned Single Judge noticed that sufficient opportunity had been given, but no written statement had been filed. There was no valid justification for not filing the written statement. Moreover, the facts that Bhim Singh was posted in Gulmarg post; the Chief Minister, Haryana sent his condolence letter; the widow was duly honoured in a function organized to honour widows of martyrs in Operation Vijay in Kargil Sector, were not disputed in the proposed written statement, nor it was disputed that condolence was paid to the deceased in the Haryana Vidhan Sabha on 27.7.1999. Accordingly, the review petition was dismissed.

5. In the grounds of appeal, it has been stated that death of L/Nk Bhim Singh took place when he was sleeping in 180 LBS Tent pitched between Mandir and Signal Centre at TAC HQ Gulmarg alongwith six other Jawans. On 3.7.1999 at about 0055 a.m., the patrolling sentry heard the cries of the deceased. The
deceased had already vomited outside the tent and also near his cot. He was crying with pain in his chest. He was rushed to Medical Inspection Room of High Altitude Warfare School and was given emergency treatment, to which he did not respond. He was declared dead at 0230 hours. His body was handed over for post-mortem and was, thereafter, sent in a Government vehicle for being handed over to the next of his kin at his home town.

The remarks of the Commandant were as under:-

The death of deceased No.873651868 L/Nk Bhim Singh happened due to “Cardio Respiratory Arrest”.

However, in this connection FIR has been lodged with Police Station, Gulmarg vide our letter No.OPS/
THQ/193 Bn/99, dt. 3 rd July, 99. Copy enclosed alongwith eye sketch.

Sd/-
Commandant, 193 Bn BSF.

The body was received and State funeral was given and an amount of Rs.2.5 lacs was also given to the widow without receiving the documents, showing cause of death. It was later revealed that death was not on account of “battle casualty”, but was natural and case of the writ petitioner was not covered by the
Haryana Government instructions. It has been further stated that order of learned Single Judge was obtained by the petitioner by fraud by misstating that the deceased died while fighting with enemies. It has been further stated that all dead bodies of army/paramilitary forces are given due honour as mark of respect and it does not make the dependents of the deceased eligible for the ex-gratia benefit.

6. We have heard learned counsel for the parties.

7. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the written statement could not be filed on account of pen down strike in the Secretariat. Learned counsel further submitted that the office of the Advocate General informed the State only on 11.12.2000 and the concerned officer requested the Advocate General to seek adjournment for one month and was under the impression that adjournment will be granted and, therefore, reply could not be filed. On account of pen down strike, letter dated 8.1.2001 was not delivered in the office in time and proper instructions could not be given to the Law Officer. It was
submitted that in these circumstances, learned Single Judge was not justified in deciding the case without written statement having been filed. It was next submitted that the death was a natural death and not on account of “battle casualty”, which was the only situation in which compensation was to be given. The widow has not approached the Court with clean hands by not mentioning that an amount of Rs.2.5 lacs had already been received by her. She only stated that she received only Rs.18,000/-.

8. Learned counsel for the writ petitioner supported the impugned orders. It was submitted that the petitioner was entitled to compensation due as per declared policy which was clearly applicable. Mere fact that receipt of Rs.2.5 lacs could not be mentioned in the writ petition, did not mean that the writ petitioner deliberately withheld the information. The said amount could be adjusted in the final payment, which is yet to be made. Neither policy of ex-gratia payment was shown to be confined to “battle casualty” nor the said term could be given restricted meaning to deny compensation to the petitioner, having regard to peculiar situation which was sought to be dealt with by the policy in question. All persons dying, while on duty at high altitude, during Kargil Operation, constituted one class.

9. Question is whether the petitioner was entitled to exgratia payment, as held by learned Single Judge?

10. We are of the view that no interference is called for with the view taken by learned Single Judge. Inspite of due opportunity, the State failed to defend the case. As has been held in the review order, notice was issued to the State for 30.11.2000. Thereafter, the case was taken up on 4.12.2000.

The State had been duly served and was represented by counsel.

Except saying that the Advocate General’s office did not inform the concerned officer upto 8.1.2001, there is no explanation for not filing the written statement. Alleged pen down strike was on 8.1.2001. The State had received notice on 30.11.2000. The nature of case was urgent one as widow of a martyr was seeking justice and such a case had to be given top priority. All concerned were expected to act efficiently. If Advocate General office did not act efficiently, it was lapse of the State itself which did not
furnish any ground for seeking review.

11. In any case, even if we take into account the written statement, there is no ground whatsoever to deny relief to the petitioner widow. No document has been filed with the written statement or with the appeal which may show that the writ petitioner was not entitled to the financial benefit declared for the widows of the martyrs. Admittedly, L/Nk Bhim Singh was on duty in Kargil Sector. He was 33 years of age. He was on duty in connection with the Army operations. Annexure P-1, the report of the Regimental Medical Officer, High Altitude Welfare School, mentions that the deceased had injuries on the forehead.
According to Annexure R-1/2, filed on behalf of the State, the death was due to cardio respiratory arrest at THQ, Gulmarg.

Mere fact that in the post-mortem report, there was no mention of head injury and death was said to due to “myocardial infarction due to high altitude” which led to pulmonary edema, made no difference to the decision of the case.

11. The fact remains that the death was while serving the Army during Operation Vijay at a forward posting at high altitude, which by itself involved risk to life. The deceased was not on a pleasure trip, but was there to serve the cause of armed forces.

He was in prime of his youth. His death cannot be called natural death, not attributable to the cause of serving the Army. In such a situation, if he lost his life, it cannot be said that he was not a martyr. If the State declared a policy of giving financial aid to families of martyrs, it cannot deny such aid on hyper technical grounds now pleaded. Action of the State must match its words.

The deceased had widow and three children aged 3, 5 and 7 years, apart from parents. They have been deprived of financial aid for almost a decade. They have been entangled in needless litigation.

12. We are of the view that claim of the widow in the writ petition was just and should have been readily accepted by the State without any contest.

13. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed with costs quantified at Rs.50,000/-. The amount which remains unpaid be now paid within one month from receipt of a copy of this order with interest @ 9% per annum from the date the amount was due upto the date of payment.

(ADARSH KUMAR GOEL)
JUDGE

(JITENDRA CHAUHAN)
JUDGE


HANUMAN SINGH Vs THE STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS CWP 2094 of 2007
Monday, 4th May, 2009

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB and HARYANA, CHANDIGARH

Date of Decision: May 21, 2009

Lajpat Rai DAV College, Jagraon, District Ludhiana …..PETITIONER(S)
VERSUS
State of Punjab and Others …..RESPONDENT(S)

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA

PRESENT: -
Mr. Aman Chaudhary, Advocate, for the petitioner.

AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral)
The prayer made in this civil writ petition filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India is for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to comply with the directions given by Division Bench of this Court while dealing with Civil Writ Petition No.14340 of 2006 titled ‘Arya College, Ludhiana Vs. State of Punjab and Others’, decided on 18.12.2007.

It has been brought out that the petitioner is helping the State to achieve its welfare policies. The State of Punjab implemented a scheme known as `95% Deficit Grant in Aid Scheme’ for granting financial assistance to non government aided colleges. The State Government took a conscious decision to provide financial assistance to private aided colleges to enable these colleges to pay the scales recommended by the UGC so as to maintain minimum standards in higher education on the basis of sanctioned strength of teaching and non teaching employees. Because the respondents are not
releasing the admissible grant in aid, the petitioner is unable to pay the teaching and non teaching staff which seriously hampers the working of the Institution.

Issue notice of motion.

Mr. Anil Sharma, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, on the asking of the Court, accepts notice. Copy of the petition has been handed over.

Heard.

Learned counsel for the respondents has not been able to dispute that grant in aid is required to be released in terms of the judgment relied upon on behalf of the petitioner.

I have considered the issue. The Division Bench in the case of Arya College, Ludhiana (supra), issued directions in the following terms:-

Accordingly, we direct the State to meet its liability as per its declared scheme within three months from today.

The State will be at liberty to rely upon the record already available or to have access to such other record of the petitioner-college as, may be necessary, but on this account, the State will not avoid its liability. We make it clear that Secretary, Higher Education, Punjab will be held personally liable in case of default in meeting the liability.

This Court has considered the very issue while dealing with Civil Writ Petition o.4464 of 2009 titled ‘BLM Girls College, Arya Samaj, Nawanshahr vs. State of Punjab and Others’, decided on 21.3.2009 and Civil Writ Petition No.5393 of 2008, titled ‘Ramgaria College of Education, Phagwara vs. State of Punjab and Others’, decided on 24.4.2008, in which also the respondent-State has been directed to release the grant in aid.

In Civil Writ Petition No.3191 of 2007 titled `The Managing Committee, Guru Gobind Singh College, Saghera, Barnala, District Sangrur vs. State of Punjab and Another’ decided on 19.2.2008, similar view has been taken and direction was issued to the respondents to release grant in aid. Special Leave Petition was filed by the State of Punjab, the same being SLP No.15798 of 2008 which was dismissed on 8.12.2008.

Considering the directions issued by this Court in various cases as noticed above, and in the facts and circumstances of this case, it is directed that the respondents shall pay 85% of the grant-in-aid due to the petitioner within a period of 4 months after clearance of objections by the petitioner. So far as balance 15% of the amount of grant-in-aid due is concerned, the petitioner may submit separate representation to the respondents.

Petition is allowed in the above terms.

(AJAI LAMBA)
JUDGE


RAVI SHARMA Vs MAHARISHI DAYANAND UNIVERSITY ROHTAK and OTHERS Civil Writ Petition 6638 of 2009
Friday, 1st May, 2009
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB and HARYANA, CHANDIGARH

Date of Decision: May 01, 2009

Ravi Sharma …..PETITIONER(S)
VERSUS
Maharishi Dayanand University, Rohtak and Others …..RESPONDENT(S)

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA

PRESENT: -
Mr. Sharmila Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner.

AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral)
Learned counsel for the petitioner has not been able to dispute that at the point in time when the admissions were to be given, the petitioner could not clear Mathematics exam (qualifying exam), and
therefore, clearly the petitioner was not eligible for admission to B.Tech Course for academic session 2008-2009. It is further not in dispute that in the entrance test, the petitioner could not make it for admission.

No ground for invoking extraordinary writ

jurisdiction is made out as Orders, Annexure P-2 and P-3 have been passed for given reasons legality of which cannot be disputed.

The petition is dismissed.

(AJAI LAMBA)
JUDGE


EKTA NARANG Vs MAHARSHI DAYANAND UNIVERSITY AND OTHERS
Monday, 27th April, 2009
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

C.W.P. No. 6276 of 2009

DATE OF DECISION : 27.04.2009

Ekta Narang …. PETITIONER
Versus
Maharshi Dayanand University and others ….. RESPONDENTS

CORAM :-
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL

Present:
Mr. Nilesh Bhardwaj, Advocate, for the petitioner.

SATISH KUMAR MITTAL , J.
The petitioner has filed the instant petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for quashing the order dated 4.3.2009 (Annexure P-16), passed by the Vice Chancellor, Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak (hereinafter referred to as `the respondent University'), whereby the claim of the petitioner for her appointment to the post of Lecturer in BioTechnology Engineering in the University Institute of Engineering and Technology, has been rejected. In the petition, the petitioner has also prayed for quashing the appointments of respondents No.3 to 9 to the post of Lecturer in Bio-Technology Engineering.

In the present case, vide advertisement No. 3/2008 (Annexure P-2), the respondent University invited applications for various teaching and non-teaching posts under budgeted posts and Self Financing Scheme, including four posts of Lecturer in Bio-Technology Engineering in the Department of Engineering and Technology under Self Financing Scheme as `likely to continue'. The petitioner and respondents No.3 to 6 also applied for the said post. After the interview, the statutory Selection Committee selected respondents No.3 to 6 against the aforesaid four advertised posts of Lecturer in Bio-Technology Engineering. Name of the petitioner was kept at serial No.5. On the basis of the said selection, which was duly approved by the Executive Council, respondents No.3 to 6 were offered appointments and they joined on the posts of Lecturer in Bio-Technology Engineering.

Subsequently, one regular post of Lecturer in Bio-Technology fell vacant on 30.10.2008, on submission of resignation by Dr. Reeti Chaudhary, who was already working in that institution. The petitioner submitted a representation dated 10.11.2008 (Annexure P-7) with the request that her name be considered against the said post and she should be given appointment as Lecturer in Bio-Technology Engineering. When no
decision was taken on the said representation, the petitioner filed CWP No. 2261 of 2009, claiming appointment on the post of Lecturer in BioTechnology Engineering on the ground that one regular post has fallen vacant and therefore, the person at Serial No.1 of the select list should be appointed against that post and against the resultant vacancy in `likely to be continued' post, the petitioner should be appointed. Since the representation regarding the said relief was under consideration of the respondent University, the said writ petition was disposed of with a direction to the
respondent University to take a final decision in the matter before the expiry of the validity of the panel. In terms of the said direction, vide order dated 4.3.2009 (Annexure P-16), claim of the petitioner was considered against the said vacant post, occurred due to the resignation by Dr. Reeti Chaudhary and it was found that against the said post, claim of the petitioner cannot be considered, because the post vacated by Dr. Reeti Chaudhary was quite different from the posts advertised vide Advertisement No.3/2008, and the petitioner, who is at serial No.5 in the panel, could not be appointed against a regular Government approved post held by Dr. Reeti Chaudhary.

Aggrieved against the said order, the instant petition has been filed by the petitioner.

As far as challenge to the appointments of respondents No.3 to 9 to the post of Lecturer in Bio-Technology Engineering, on the ground that the petitioner was more meritorious than these respondents, is concerned, the same cannot be gone into in the instant petition, because this ground was not taken by the petitioner in her earlier petition.

Therefore, now she cannot be permitted to challenge the appointments of respondents No.3 to 9 on the post of Lecturer in Bio-Technology Engineering, which fell vacant on
resignation submitted by Dr. Reeti Chaudhary.

I have heard the arguments of learned counsel for the petitioner.

After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner and going through the impugned order, whereby claim of the petitioner for appointment against the said post has been rejected, I do not find any ground to interfere in the impugned order. It is not disputed before me that Dr. Reeti Chaudhary was appointed on a regular/`to be continued' post, advertised in the year 2006 vide advertisement No.3-5/2006. After her
selection and appointment, Dr. Reeti Chaudhary joined on the said post on 1.6.2007.

As far as the petitioner and respondents No.3 to 6 are concerned, their posts, which were four in number, were designated as `likely to continue' and were advertised vide advertisement No.3/2008. Against the said advertisement, the Selection Committee recommended the names of respondents No.3 to 6 for appointment and name of the petitioner was kept at serial No.5 in the panel. In fact the post held by Dr. Reeti Chaudhary is a regular/`to be continued' post and the posts against which the petitioner had applied are different posts, which are not regular. As per the Self Financing Scheme, some teaching posts have been sanctioned and designated as `to be continued' and the same were made in the running grade. Those posts were regular budgeted posts and some posts have been designated as `likely to continue', which were to be filled up on contract basis at monthly consolidated salary equal to the total amount at the initial stage in the pay scale. The four posts, for which the petitioner applied, were designated as `likely to continue' and the nature of those posts was contractual, but not regular, whereas the post, which was held by Dr. Reeti Chaudhary and who was appointed against the advertisement issued in the year 2006, was designated as `to be continued' and the nature of the said post was regular.

Therefore, in my opinion, respondent No.2 has rightly rejected the claim of the petitioner for her appointment, being waiting list candidate, against the post fallen vacant due to the resignation of Dr. Reeti Chaudhary.

The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner that respondent No.3, who was appointed at Serial No.1, be shifted to the post, which has fallen vacant due to the resignation by Dr. Reeti Chaudhary and thereafter, the petitioner, being waiting list candidate, should be given appointment, cannot be accepted, because the petitioner has no legal right to get the appointment. Her name can be considered, in case out of the four posts, against which she had applied, any vacancy arises for any reason.

In view of the above, there is no merit in the instant petition and the same is, hereby, dismissed.

( SATISH KUMAR MITTAL )
JUDGE


SAROJ DAHIYA Vs MAHARSHI DAYANAND UNIVERSITY ROHTAK AND OTHERS
Tuesday, 21st April, 2009


ASHOK KUMAR Vs MAHARISHI DAYANAND UNIVERSITY ROHTAK and OTHERS
Friday, 17th April, 2009
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB and HARYANA, CHANDIGARH

Civil Writ Petition No.727 of 2009

Date of Decision: April 17, 2009

Ashok Kumar …..PETITIONER(S)
VERSUS
Maharishi Dayanand University, Rohtak and Others …..RESPONDENT(S)

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA

PRESENT: -
Mr. P.R. Yadav, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. Sidharth Batra, Advocate, for the respondents.

AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral)
This civil writ petition filed under Article 226/277 of the Constitution of India challenges Order dated 19.12.2008 (Annexure P-6) under which examination of the petitioner has been cancelled on the proceedings initiated by the Standing Committee on unfair means and misconduct holding the petitioner guilty using unfair means in
the examination in which the petitioner appeared in April 2008.

Learned counsel for the petitionercontends that no such incident had occurred and
therefore, the action of the respondents is not warranted by law or facts.

Learned counsel for the respondents, on the strength of the original record produced in
Court, contends that the petitioner specifically admitted his misbehaviour with the Supervisor.

Already a lenient view has been taken and only the examination taken by the petitioner has been cancelled.

I have heard the learned counsel and considered the issue.

It transpires that during examination on 30.5.2008, a report was furnished by the Centre Superintendent which is in the following words:-

The student, Ashok Kumar, was found with mobile phone in the examination hall.

When he was checked by Supervisor he argued and misbehaved. Asst. Supdt. reported this matter to the Centre Supdt. Centre Supdt. and Dy. Supdt. advised him not to do so again, but he continued to argue and started misbehaving.

It should be also taken into consideration that the student had misbehaved on the prior exam on 28th of May, 2008 and had tried to flee the examination hall without handing over answer book after the expiry of the time for exam.

The document is signed by the Assistant Superintendent, on duty Supervisor and the
Superintendent.

It seems that a notice was served on the petitioner whereupon the petitioner, on
3.10.2008 gave in writing (in vernacular) to the effect that he had taken the examination of B.Ed. He was not aware that case for misbehaviour had been made against him. He was not at fault and he had not committed any act of misbehaviour. He be given an opportunity to appeal.

Subsequently, it seems that the petitioner was heard. On 18.10.2008, the petitioner gave a letter to the authorities in writing which is to the effect that he had taken the examination in May/June 2008 in sub-centre of B.Ed examination. He indulged in misbehaviour with the supervisory staff.

He had committed a mistake and furnishes unconditional apology.

Essentially, the petitioner accepted his misconduct as alleged against him. Considering
the totality of facts and circumstances, the penalty as noticed above has been imposed.
Learned counsel for the petitioner admits that he had given in writing accepting the
misbehaviour with the authorities. Learned counsel for the petitioner has not pointed out any procedural lapse that has caused prejudice to the rights of the petitioner. The facts and circumstances do not call for interference in extraordinary writ jurisdiction. In view of the acceptance of the misbehaviour by the petitioner, there is no reason to judicially review the order passed by the authorities.

The petition is dismissed.

(AJAI LAMBA)
JUDGE


BHUPESH DUTT SHARMA Vs MAHARISHI DAYANAND UNIVERSITY ROHTAK and ANOTHER
Monday, 30th March, 2009
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB and HARYANA, CHANDIGARH

Civil Writ Petition No.4817 of 2008

Date of Decision: March 30, 2009

Bhupesh Dutt Sharma …..PETITIONER(S)
VERSUS
Maharishi Dayanand University, Rohtak and Another …..RESPONDENT(S)

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA

PRESENT: -
Mr. Kamal Mor, Advocate, for the petitioner.

AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral)
This civil writ petition filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India prays for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing Letter dated 18.2.2009 (Annexure P-3). Further prayer made in the petition is for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to consider the petitioner as eligible candidate and that, his admission to Bachelor of Engineering Course be regularised.

Annexure P-3 is a communication received from Maharishi Dayanand University, Rohtak. Perusal of Annexure P-3 indicates that the petitioner was declared as ineligible candidate for admission to Bachelor of Engineering Course for the reason, “Fail in the subject of Physics in his qualifying 10+2 exam, which is compulsory to pass as per the eligibility condition”. Learned counsel contends that the Prospectus provides that a person would be eligible for admission, if he passes qualifying examination i.e. 10+2. As per the result declared, the petitioner has been shown as ‘Pass’. In this context, reliance has been placed on Annexure P-2. I have considered the contentions of the learned counsel and the contents of the petition. Perusal of Annexure P-2 indicates that the petitioner failed in theory paper of Physics. This fact is not even disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioner. The petitioner was required to pass in qualifying examination i.e. 10+2. This being the admitted fact that the petitioner failed in Physics, no ground for interference in extraordinary writ jurisdiction is made out. The petition is dismissed.

(AJAI LAMBA)
JUDGE


RAM AJAUR Vs MAHARISHI DAYANAND UNIVERSITY ROHTAK AND OTHERS
Monday, 23rd March, 2009
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

C.W.P. No. 4564 of 2009

DATE OF DECISION : 23.03.2009

Ram Ajaur …. PETITIONER
Versus
Maharishi Dayanand University, Rohtak and others ….. RESPONDENTS

CORAM :-
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL

Present:
Mr. N.K. Malhotra, Advocate, for the petitioner.

SATISH KUMAR MITTAL , J. ( Oral )
Counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner may be permitted to withdraw this petition with liberty to file fresh one with better particulars.

Dismissed as withdrawn with the aforesaid liberty.

( SATISH KUMAR MITTAL )
JUDGE


VICKEY DAHIYA Vs M D UNIVERSITY ROHTAK AND ANOTHER
Wednesday, 15th July, 2009
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

LPA No.600 of 2009 (O and M)

Date of decision: 15.7.2009

Vickey Dahiya —–Appellant
Vs.
M.D.University, Rohtak and another Respondent

CORAM:-
HONBLE MR JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL
HONBLE MRS. JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY

Present:-
Mr. Nitesh Bhardwaj, Advocate for the appellant.

Adarsh Kumar Goel,J.
1. This appeal has been preferred against judgment of learned Single Judge dated 27.5.2009, dismissing the writ petition, challenging cancellation of his admission and striking off his name from the College rolls.

2. The appellant took admission to BDS in the year 2005-06 and failed to pass examination of First Year within three years as required. He also did not attend the requisite number of lecturers. On that account, his name was struck off from the college rolls and his admission was cancelled in accordance with the rules and regulations applicable.

3. The above action was challenged. Learned Single Judge held that there was no ground to interfere, as it was not disputed that the case of the appellant was covered by the provision of Clause 3.5 of the BDS Ordinance, providing for striking off name from college rolls for absence for more than 15 days at a stretch. Case of the appellant was also covered under Clause 3.1, which required attendance of 75% of lectures, which condition had not been fulfilled by the appellant.

4. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant.

5. Only contention raised is that the appellant should have been given one more chance to take examination under the un-amended regulation.

6. It having not been disputed that the appellant was not eligible having not attended the requisite number of lectures and having not passed the examination of First Year within three years, there is no ground for interference with the view taken by the learned Single Judge.

7. The appeal is dismissed.

(Adarsh Kumar Goel)
Judge

(Daya Chaudhary)
Judge


RAHUL DAULTA Vs CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATION MAHARISHI DAYANANDA UNI
Tuesday, 14th July, 2009
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

CWP No. 7480 of 2009

Date of decision 14 .7.2009

Rahul Daulta … Petitioner
Versus
Controller of Examination, Maharishi Dayananda University, Rohtak and another … Respondents.

CORAM:
HONBLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR
HONBLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH

Present:
Mr. Sajjan Malik,Advocate for the petitioner
Ms. Anamika Negi, Advocate for the respondents

1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgement ?
2. To be referred to the Reporter or not ?
3. Whether the judgement should be reported in the Digest ?

M.M.KUMAR, J.
The petitioner had taken the of 1 st semester examination of Master of Business Administration (Business Accounts) in December, 2008.

He passed only one paper out of the six papers as per the result declared on 8.4.2009. The petitioner applied for re-evaluation of two papers. The result of re-evaluation was not declared. However, examination of 2 nd semester commenced. In pursuance of Rule 8 (iv) of the Ordinance, the petitioner was not entitled to take the examination of 2 nd semester unless he had completed 50 percent of the papers in the preceding semester examination i.e. 1 st semester. Accordingly he was required to qualify atleast three papers of the 1 st semester whereas he had qualified only one and in respect of other two his application for re-evaluation was pending.

When the matter came up for consideration before this Court on 20.5.2009 we noticed the aforesaid factual position and found that in the absence of declaration of result of re-evaluation it could not be presumed that the petitioner would not qualify under rule 8(iv) of the Ordinance of passing in two more subjects. We allowed the petitioner to appear in the examination of 2 nd semester subject to the result of the petition. We clarified that appearance of the petitioner in the examination was to be at his own risk and responsibility and it would not create any equitable right in his favour. The aforesaid order was passed after issuing notice to the respondents and in the presence of their counsel.

At the hearing Ms. Anamika Negi, learned counsel for the respondents has stated that result of re-evaluation has been declared on 26.6.2009 and the petitioner after re-evaluation has failed to qualify in either of the two papers. A photo copy of the result card has been placed on record (Mark “A”). It has thus become apparent that the petitioner does not answer the requirement of Rule 8(iv) of the Ordinance which requires him to pass atleast 50% of the papers of the 1 st semester in order to take the
examination of the 2 nd semester. Therefore, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed.

For the reasons afore-mentioned this petition fails and the same is dismissed.

(M.M.Kumar)
Judge

(Jaswant Singh)
Judge


DR SANDEEP SINGH Vs MAHARSHI DAYANAND UNIVERSITY ROHTAK AND ANOTHER
Friday, 10th July, 2009
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

C.W.P. No. 9129 of 2009

DATE OF DECISION : 10.07.2009

Dr. Sandeep Singh …. PETITIONER
Versus
Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak and another ….. RESPONDENTS

CORAM :-
HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL

Present:
Mr. Surender Lamba, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. Anurag Goyal, Advocate, for the respondents.

SATISH KUMAR MITTAL , J. ( Oral )
Counsel for the petitioner states that since the necessary relief has been granted to the petitioner, therefore, this petition has become infructuous.

Dismissed as having rendered infructuous.

( SATISH KUMAR MITTAL )
JUDGE


SANJEEV KUMAR Vs STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER
Monday, 3rd August, 2009
CWP No.57 of 2009

In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh.

Date of decision: 03.08.2009

Sanjeev Kumar
Vs.
State of Haryana and another

CORAM:
HON BLE MR. JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI

Present:
Mr.Shiv Raj Malik, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr.Narender Hooda, Advocate, for the respondents.

PERMOD KOHLI, J. (Oral):
The petitioner is a serving employee in a private school. He applied for admission to three years LL.B. Course (Evening) for the session 2006-07 which was being pursued by respondent No.2. He was admitted to
the course aforesaid. He deposited a sum of Rs.20,000/- as fee. The petitioner appeared in the first year examination and out of 9, he cleared 7 papers. It is the petitioners own case that though he was entitled to be
admitted to the Second year LL.B.Course (Evening) despite the fact that he failed in two papers, but on account of the illness of his father, the petitioner could not take admission in the second year of the said course.

The petitioner, however, appeared in the next year for taking two papers and cleared the same. Thereafter, the petitioner applied for admission to second year course during the session 2008-09. He was refused admission on the ground that the University has already closed the evening session and there is no classes for the second year LL.B. Course (evening) during the Session 2008-09. The petitioner also applied for Inter University Migration Certificate, but the same has also not been issued and the petitioner was asked to fill up the requisite form for issue of the final migration certificate.

The petitioner, thereafter, claims to have made representation to the ViceChancellor and also served a legal notice dated 21.11.2008 which has been declined vide Annexure P-5 and the claim of the petitioner for admission to second year LL.B. Course (Evening) has been declined on account of closing of the evening session of the academic Session 2007-08.

As regards the issue of Inter University Migration Certificate is concerned, the petitioner applied for the same on prescribed form along with fee. He wanted migration certificate from this University. The petitioner has accordingly filed this petition seeking a direction for his admission to second year LL.B. Course.

On being put to notice, respondents have filed detailed reply. It is admitted that the petitioner was given admission in three years LL.B. (Evening) course in the session 2006-07. It is the stand of the respondents that the petitioner did not seek admission for second year though he was entitled to seek such admission. It is further stated that respondent No.2 discontinued the new admission in the evening classes from the Session
2007-08 and the evening classes have been closed and the students who had taken admission during Session 2006-07 were only allowed to complete the course. It is further stated that since there was no batch for the second year LL.B. Course during the academic session 2007-08, the petitioner could not be admitted to the said course in the said year.

As regards the grant of No Objection Certificate and the Inter University Migration Certificate are concerned, it is admitted that the petitioner s request was received vide letter dated 12.12.2007 wherein he conveyed that he wanted migration to Department of Laws, Maharishi Dayanand University, Rohtak. On receipt of this letter, he was conveyed by the respondents vide letter dated 15.04.2008 that his request was not acceded to. It is further mentioned that the petitioner was further conveyed that if he needed Migration Certificate, he may apply afresh with fee of Rs.150/-. The respondents have placed on record a copy of the letter dated 15.04.2008 (Annexure R-2/2).

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length.

It is the admitted case of the parties that the University stopped admission to three years evening LL.B. Course from the academic session 2007-08. It is also admitted case of the petitioner that though he was entitled to seek admission in the second year course, but he did not opt for admission on account of alleged illness of his father. Since the petitioner did not seek admission for the second year LL.B. Course, the University closed the session and when the petitioner opted for admission to second year course during the academic session 2008-09, the evening course had already been closed. Since the admission had already been closed, there was no class/batch for the second year LL.B. Course. Hence, the petitioner could not be admitted to the session 2008-09.

In view of the above circumstances, no relief can be granted to the petitioner for admission to Second year LL. B. Course (evening).

However, the claim of the petitioner for grant of No Objection Certificate/Inter University Migration Certificate has not been appropriately dealt with by the respondent-University and the claim of the petitioner was declined without any valid reasons. The petitioner had not applied to seek permanent migration and was entitled to seek Inter University Migration Certificate. No rule or regulation has been brought to my notice to show that the petitioner was not entitled to No Objection Certificate/Inter University Migration Certificate.

For the reasons recorded above, respondent No.2-University is directed to issue No Objection Certificate or Inter University Migration Certificate to the petitioner in accordance with rules within a period of four
months from today to enable the petitioner to seek admission elsewhere, if permissible under law.

With these observations, present petition is disposed of.

(PERMOD KOHLI)
JUEGE


THE VICE-CHANCELLOR MAHARSHI DAYANAND UNIVERSITY Vs DR JAHAN SINGH
Tuesday, 26th May, 2009
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

L.P.A. No. 27 of 2006

Date of Decision: May 26, 2009

The Vice-Chancellor, Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak and another …Appellants
Versus
Dr. Jahan Singh …Respondent

CORAM:
HON BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR
HON BLE MR. JUSTICE H.S. BHALLA

Present:
Dr. Balram Gupta, Senior Advocate, with
Ms. Anamika Negi, Advocate, for the appellants.
Dr. Jahan Singh, respondent-in-person.

1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

M.M. KUMAR, J.
This order shall dispose of L.P.A. No. 27 of 2006 in C.W.P. No. 7180 of 1999, L.P.A. No. 45 of 2006 in C.W.P. No. 4142 of 2000 and L.P.A. No. 46 of 2006 in C.W.P. No. 11923 of 1999, which involves common facts. These appeals have been filed under Clause X of the Letters Patent challenging judgment dated 18.5.2005 (in L.P.A. No. 27 of 2006) and common judgment dated 23.3.2005 (in L.P.A. Nos. 45 and 46 of 2006) passed by the learned Single Judge.

2. In the first writ petition bearing C.W.P. No. 7180 ofL.P.A. No. 27 of 2006 1999, the prayer made by the petitioner-respondent was to count 31 years and 6 months of service rendered by him to the State of Haryana or the Universities in Haryana for the purposes of retrial benefits. In the second C.W.P. No. 11923 of 1999, the petitionerrespondent had sought a direction to the appellant-University for grant of consequential benefits, such as, Pension, Gratuity, Earned Leave for the period he spent on Extra-ordinary leave from 30.11.1983 to 14.8.1985. He also sought a direction to count the period of Extra-ordinary Leave from 30.11.1983 to 14.8.1985 towards
promotion as Professor in Physics under the Merit Promotion Scheme devised by the University Grants Commission. In the third C.W.P. No. 4142 of 2000, the petitioner-respondent had sought fixation of pay and payment of arrears of salary w.e.f. 1.1.1996 till 31.1.2000. A further direction was sought to the respondents to pay arrears of gratuity, leave encashment and pension according to the basic pay of Rs. 20,000/- as on 31.1.2000 and also according to the revised pay scale of the University Grants Commission.

3. In order to put the controversy in its proper perspective it would first be necessary to notice the skelton facts. The petitionerrespondent has claimed to be a brilliant academician. He has secured
First Division in all the examinations from Matric to M.Sc. and he holds a Ph.D. degree in Nuclear Physics. He has published several research papers in reputed journals in India and abroad and has also been invited to attend, participate and deliver lectures in Seminars and Science Conferences at national and international level. He was awarded Merit Scholarship for study from Matric to M.Sc. in India and also in England.

4. The petitioner-respondent has worked as a Lecturer in Physics from 1.12.1965 to 9.10.1967 in the Regional Engineering College, Kurukshetra. He then worked as Research Assistant from
October 1967 to June 1970 at the Department of Physics, University of Birmingham, England. On 5.7.1970, the petitioner-respondent came back to India and worked till 30.9.1973 as confirmed Lecturer in Physics, Panjab University Post Graduate Regional Centre, Rohtak. On 1.10.1973, the petitioner-respondent joined as Assistant Director, Haryana Police Forensic Science Laboratory, Madhuban (Karnal) and worked there till 20.7.1977. He then worked as Lecturer in Physics at Kurukshetra University, Kurukshetra, from 21.7.1977 to 18.10.1977.

Thereafter, on 19.10.1977, he joined as Reader in Physics, M.D. University, Rohtak, after the approval of his selection by the 3 rd Executive Council in its meeting held on 15.10.1977. The Executive Council of the appellant-University passed a resolution and services of Dr. Jahan Singh were terminated w.e.f. 20.6.1979 allegedly on misrepresentation of facts. On 17.8.1979, Government of Haryana appointed a Commission of Enquiry under the Chairmanship of Justice S.S. Dulat (Retd.).

5. The term of reference of Justice Dulat Commission of Enquiry was to enquire into the alleged acts of omission and commission committed by the then Vice Chancellor, Shri Hardwari Lal. The case concerning the termination of service of the petitionerrespondent was also referred to the Commission who submitted its report to the Government of Haryana on 30.6.1980. The conclusion about the petitioner-respondent has been set out in the report, which reads thus:-

The only conclusion to my mind is that Shri Hardwari Lal was so upset about and so annoyed with Dr. Jahan Singh that he permitted himself to present as dark a picture of Dr. Jahan Singh s work and conduct as he could. I cannot, therefore, escape the conclusion that the Vice-Chancellor Shri Hardwari Lal failed to deal with Dr. Jahan Singh fairly.

6. The report of Dulat Commission was laid before the State Assembly and it was duly accepted. The report was sent to the Chancellor recommending necessary action as under:-

A copy of the report has been sent to the Governor of Haryana who is also the ex-officio Chancellor of the Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak, inviting his attention to the acts of Omission and Commission committed by Shri Hardwari Lal and requesting him to take necessary action in the matter.

7. After the acceptance of Dulat Commission Report by the Government of Haryana and Chancellor of the University, Shri Hardwari Lal had accepted his mistakes and praised the work and conduct of the petitioner-respondent in his statement put up before the Executive Council meeting held on 29.1.1982, vide item No. 72. Thereafter, on 5.10.1983, Shri Hardwari Lal, had allowed the petitioner-respondent to rejoin the University as Reader in Physics on the same post which was held by him before the termination of his services. Accordingly, the petitioner was appointed as Reader in Physics vide appointment letter No. ET-2/83/19683, dated 5.10.1983.

The action taken by the Vice-Chancellor was approved by the Executive Council vide its Resolution No. 26 in its meeting held on 6.10.1983.

8. While the petitioner-respondent was out of service, the then Vice-Chancellor, University of Kashmir, recommended his case to Head of Physics Department, University of Zambia for assignment as Senior Lecturer. Thereafter, the Secretary of the University of Zambia, vide letter dated 27.9.1983, offered the post of Senior Lecturer in Physics to the petitioner-respondent. On the basis of the report of the Dulat Commission, the petitioner-respondent was reinstated in service and he joined his post of Reader in Physics on 5.10.1983 from which his services were terminated. The petitionerrespondent submitted an application to the appellant-University for grant of leave, which was sanctioned by the Executive Council vide their Resolution dated 21.11.1983. On 29.11.1983, the petitionerrespondent went on two years leave to work as Senior Lecturer in Physics in the University of Zambia, Lusaka (South Africa).

9. He came back and again joined the appellant-University on 14.8.1985. On 29.9.1985, the petitioner-respondent submitted an application to the Vice-Chancellor of the appellant-University for grant of three increments by counting the period of extra-ordinary leave as duty period. The petitioner-respondent was promoted as Professor in Physics w.e.f. 31.3.1986.

10. Later on a dispute with regard to treating the period spent by the petitioner-respondent in Zambia arose. On 25.3.1991, the Executive Council of the appellant-University decided that the break in service of Dr. Jahan Singh be condoned with all consequential benefits of continuous service. Except for the financial benefits, his original position as Reader in Physics was restored.

The decision was communicated on 10.4.1991. The original seniority of the petitionerrespondent w.e.f. his initial date of appointment was restored in the Department of Physics. The seniority of the petitioner-respondent in the cadre of Reader was fixed vide letter dated 29.5.1991 by taking
into consideration his total service in that cadre. On 18.7.1991, the Executive Council of the appellant-University decided to count the period of extra-ordinary leave of the petitioner-respondent towards annual increments. The said decision was again reiterated in its meeting held on 7.3.1992. On 28.12.1991, a communication was sent to the petitioner-respondent promoting him as Professor of Physics w.e.f. 31.3.1986. On 23.1.1993, the position of the petitionerrespondent as Professor was restored.

11. The Vice-Chancellor of the appellant University granted approval to the counting of extra-ordinary leave from 30.11.1983 to 14.8.1985 towards annual increments in terms of Clause 26(c) of the Leave Regulations, which was conveyed to the petitioner-respondent vide letter dated 6.2.1995. On 31.3.1998, the petitioner-respondent represented that benefits of service rendered by him in other institutions before joining the appellant-University be granted. The Executive Council of the appellant-University passed Resolution No. 35 in its meeting held on 11.6.1998, approving the Pension Scheme in the University w.e.f. 1.4.1995. On 20.7.1998, options for the pension scheme from the teachers of the appellant-University were invited.

The petitioner-respondent submitted his option for the pension scheme on 21.8.1998 (P-20).

12. The petitioner-respondent also claimed additional three years benefit in service in terms of Clause 17 of the notification dated 24.12.1998, issued by the University Grants Commission,
which stipulates that benefit in service upto a maximum of 3 years could be provided to the teachers who have acquired Ph.D degree at the time of entry. On 6.4.1999, the petitioner-respondent submitted another application for counting the service rendered by him in the State of Haryana towards retirement benefits i.e. gratuity and pension etc.

13. Since the concerned authority did not implement the decision of the Executive Council, dated 25.3.1991, regarding condonation of break in service, the petitioner-respondent filed CWP No. 5093 of 1999, which was allowed by a Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 27.1.2000 holding that the petitionerrespondent is entitled to re-fixation of his pay by treating the period from 20.6.1979 to 4.11.1983 so as to include the increments that accrued to him during this period. The petitioner-respondent retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation w.e.f. 31.1.2000.

The SLP filed by the appellant-University against the order dated 27.1.2000 passed in CWP No. 5093 of 1999, was dismissed on 6.11.2000.

14. The petitioner-respondent also filed CWP No. 7272 of 1998, claiming the relief of re-fixation of his pay during the break period by treating his service continuous, which was dismissed by the
learned Single Judge. Letters Patent Appeal No. 2 of 2002 against the said judgment, filed by the petitioner-respondent was also dismissed. The matter was taken to Hon ble the Supreme Court by
the petitioner-respondent and while disposing of Civil Appeal No. 1568 of 2004 arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 10941 of 2003, matter was remanded back to this Court to hear the appeal afresh and pass a reasoned order by taking into consideration all relevant aspects of the matter after giving opportunity of hearing to the parties. After remand, LPA No. 2 of 2002 was decided again on 29.11.2004 in favour of the petitioner-respondent. The appellant-University was directed to give the benefit of annual increments to the petitionerrespondent in lieu of the period of extra-ordinary leave from 30.11.1983 to 14.8.1985. The appellant University challenged order dated 29.11.2004 before Hon ble the Supreme Court and Civil Appeal No. 853 of 2006 (Vice Chancellor, M.D. University, Rohtak v. Jahan Singh, 2007 (3) SLR 381). On 8.3.2007, Hon ble the Supreme Court set aside the order of Letters Patent Bench passed in L.P.A. No. 2 of 2002, dated 29.11.2004 and restored the order of learned Single Judge.

15. After considering the aforementioned factual matrix and the contentions raised by the parties in detail, the learned Single Judge allowed C.W.P. No. 7180 of 1999 vide judgment dated 18.5.2005 and C.W.P. No. 11923 of 1999 and C.W.P. No. 4141 of 2000 vide common judgment dated 23.3.2005.

16. Learned Single Judge vide his order dated 18.5.2005 held that the petitioner-respondent was entitled to continuity of service from the date his services were terminated i.e. 20.6.1979 till the date of his re-instatement on 5.10.1983. The observation of learned Single Judge in that regard reads thus:-

……The aforesaid sequence of events would make it abundantly clear that the petitioner is entitled to continuity of service from the date his services were terminated and reappointment on 05.10.1983. In fact, this matter is no longer res-integra. The matter has been considered by Division Bench of this Court in CWP No. 5093 of 1999 decided on 27.01.2000. It has been held
that the period between 20.06.1979 to 04.10.1983 would be treated as the period spent on duty.

The petitioner was only denied monetary benefits. ……

17. In respect of gratuity, learned Single Judge placed reliance on Regulation 41(1)(a) and in respect of pension he has sought support from the Maharshi Dayanand University Pension Scheme, 1977. Accordingly, it has been held that the petitionerrespondent was entitled to count the entire service rendered by him in different institutions for pension and gratuity. The claim of the petitioner-respondent for grant of three increments was also upheld by placing reliance on clause 17 of the notification dated 24.12.1998 issued by the University Grants Commission. After placing reliance on the judgment of Hon ble the Supreme Court in the case of Purshottam Lal v. Union of India, AIR 1973 SC 1088, learned Single Judge held that the petitioner-respondent was entitled to be given the benefit of clause 17 of the UGC notification and accordingly directions were issued in the following terms:-

In view of the above, the writ petition is allowed.

The respondents are directed to re-determine the pension and the gratuity payable to the petitioner by giving benefit of the entire service rendered by the petitioner in different institutions as enumerated in the writ petition i.e. the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of service as follows:-

(i) Lecturer in Physics, Regional Engg.

Regional Engg. College, Kurukshetra from 1.12.1965 to 9.10.1967.

(ii) Lecturer in Physics, Punjab University, Post Graduate Regional Centre, Rohtak from
5.7.1970 to 30.9.1973.

(iii) Assistant Director (Class-I) Gazetted Officer) Haryana Police Forensic Science Laboratory, Madhuban (Karnal) from 1.10.1973 to 20.7.1977.

(iv) Lecturer in Physics, Kurukshetra University, Kurukshetra from 21.7.1977 to 18.10.1977.

The aforesaid period is total 9 years and 2 months in addition to the benefit of service which has already been granted to the petitioner from 19.10.1977 to 31.1.2000.

The petitioner shall also be entitled to the benefit of three years service for possessing the qualification of Ph.D. The respondents are directed to re-determine the retrial benefits of the petitioner and release the same within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a
certified copy of this order.

18. The other two appeals namely LPA Nos. 45 and 46 of 2006 emerge from CWP No. 4142 of 2000 and CWP No. 11923 of 1999 respectively. The learned Single Judge has placed reliance on
the observations made by a Division Bench of this Court in its judgment dated 27.1.2000 rendered in CWP No. 5093 of 1999, which is between the same parties. The observations of the Division Bench reads thus:-

The grievance now made before us is that even though the petitioner is about to retire in a couple of days the University has not so far re-fixed his pay during the break period by treating his service continuous. In the written statement filed by the University, it is no where pleaded that the pay of the petitioner was re-fixed for the break period or that the increments to which he became
entitled were paid to him. It is averred in the reply that on his re-appointment the petitioner was granted pay which he was drawing before his services were terminated on 20.06.1978. It is, thus, clear that the resolution passed by the Executive Council condoning the break in service has not been implemented in its entirety and the petitioner has not been granted the consequential benefits. A bare reading of the resolution passed by the Executive Council makes it clear that the
petitioner is entitled to have his service from 20.6.1979 to 4.10.1983 counted and his pay re-fixed after calculating the increments which he would have earned during the said period. This not having been done, we have no hesitation in allowing the writ petition which we hereby do and direct the University to re-fix the pay of the petitioner from 20.6.1979 till 4.10.1983 treating him
in service and giving him the benefit of annual increments which he would have earned during that period. We further direct the University to re-fix his pay for the period after he was re-appointed till the date of his promotion as Professor and pay him the arrears of pay for that period. For the sake of clarification, we may mention that the petitioner would not be entitled to the arrears of pay for the period from 20.6.1979 to 4.10.1983. We may also observe that the petitioner will be entitled to all the consequential retiral benefits by treating him in service for the aforesaid break period. He will also be entitled to gratuity and pension by treating him in service during that period. The University is further directed to pay the arrears to the petitioner within a period of one months together with interest thereon @ 15% per annum. The Vice-Chancellor of the University
shall fix the responsibility of the office concerned who was responsible for re-fixing the pay of the petitioner and the amount of interest paid by the University shall be recovered from that officer without debiting the amount to the account of the University. Petitioner is entitled to have his costs which are assessed at Rs. 5000/-.

19. It is, thus, obvious that the petitioner-respondent became entitled to have his service counted from 20.6.1979 to 4.10.1983. He also became entitled to his pay fixation after calculating the
increments which he would have earned otherwise during that period.

He was, thus, deserved to be treated in service from 20.6.1979 to 4.10.1983. A further direction was also issued to the University- appellant to refix his pay for the period he was re-appointed till date of his promotion as Professor and pay him arrears of pay for that period. He was, however, not held entitled to arrears of pay for the period 20.6.1979 to 4.10.1983 but was otherwise held entitled to all the consequential retiral benefits by treating him in service for the aforesaid break period. He was also held entitled to gratuity and pension by treating him in service during that period. The arrears were required to be paid along with interest at the rate of 15% per annum.

20. The learned Single Judge then refers to the entitlement of the petitioner-respondent for promotion with effect from 31.3.1986 as the entire period in dispute has been treated to be period spent on duty and went on to observe as under:-

……He was promoted on the post of Professor of Physics by order dated 19.02.1991 in the pay scale of Rs. 4500-150-5700-200-7300/-. Subsequently, by order dated 28.12.1991 the petitioner was ordered to be promoted with effect from 31.03.1986 i.e. cut of date on which the petitioner became eligible for promotion. It was made clear in the order that the promotion shall be for the limited purpose of pay fixation and no arrears shall be paid. However, for future promotion under the Scheme, the period shall be counted from the cut of date of the eligibility year. In view of the clarification dated 18.08.1984 and the communication dated 28.12.1991, there shall be no justification to deny the promotion to the petitioner on the post of Professor with effect from
31.03.1986.

On 18.08.1984, the University Grants Commission had issued the following directions to the ViceChancellor of the respondent-University:-

UNIVERSITY GRANTS COMMISSION BAHADUR SHAH ZAFAR MARG, NEW DELHI.

Y.D. Sharma
Deputy Secretary
D.O. No. F.1-7/83 (MP) Dated 18 Th August 1984.

Dear Vice-Chancellor
The University Grants Commission at its meeting held on 7 th July, 1984 on reference from a
university considered the question of counting the period of study leave/extra-ordinary leave availed of by a teacher towards computation of eight years of continuous service in the cadre of promotion under the Merit Promotion Scheme.

The Commission agreed that the period of leave which entitles a teacher to earn annual increment
would be counted towards computation of eight years of continuous service in the cadre of
promotion under the merit Promotion Scheme.

The above decision of the Commission may also be brought to the notice of colleges affiliated to the University.

With regards,
Yours sincerely,
Sd/-
(Y.D. Sharma)
Shri Hardwari Lal
Vice-Chancellor
Maharshi Dayanand University,
Rohtak-124 001.

These directions make it abundantly clear that the petitioner has to be granted the benefit of the period of leave towards computation of eight years of continuous service in the cadre for promotion under the Merit Promotion Scheme.

The petitions are allowed in the aforesaid terms.

The respondents are directed to grant the entire consequential relief to the petitioner within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. No costs.

21. Dr. Balram Gupta, learned Senior counsel for the appellant University has argued that according to clause VII, the period of service rendered by an employee in any State Government
or Government aided private college or in any University/ Autonomous Body shall be counted as qualifying service for pensionary benefits. He has further pointed out that clause 4(1) dealing with qualifying service include all service interrupted or continuous paid in the University and for which University share is contributed towards pension is to be treated as qualifying service.

The period of break is also to be omitted while working out aggregate service. Accordingly, it has been submitted that the learned Single Judge has grossly erred in not appreciating the specific provision relating to the pensionary benefits. In support of his submission, learned counsel has also pointed out that a University employee may have drawn the benefit in the form of Contributory Provident Fund or otherwise and his past service benefit are permitted then it would
amount granting double benefit.

22. The second submission of Dr. Gupta is that the petitioner-respondent could not be granted benefit of entire period of service from October 1977 to January 31, 2000 when he superannuated because his services were terminated by resolution of the Executive Council, dated 20.6.1979 and he could rejoin only on 5.10.1983. Even after re-joining the petitioner-respondent proceeded on extra ordinary leave from 30.11.1983 to 14.8.1985. For the aforesaid purposes, the petitioner-respondent had filed C.W.P. No. 7272 of 1998, which after various rounds of litigation, has been
dismissed by Hon ble the Supreme Court. Accordingly, the petitioner-respondent could not be held entitled to the benefit of service for the period from 30.11.1983 to 14.8.1985. In that regard,
he has placed reliance on the judgment of Hon ble the Supreme Court dated 8.3.2007 (supra) and argued that the petitioner-respondent would be entitled to increment for the period of extra ordinary leave only if he fulfilled the requirement of clause 26(ii)(a) to (c) of the Maharshi Dayanand University Calendar, Volume-III Leave Regulations. Learned counsel has further argued that grant of three years service on the basis of Ph.D. degree is also unsustainable.

According to the learned counsel, the petitioner-respondent had joined the service as Lecturer on 1.12.1965 at Regional Engineer College, Kurukshtra and acquired the degree of Ph.D in the year
1971. According to the learned counsel the petitioner-respondent was required to have acquired the degree of Ph.D at the time of joining initial service in contrast to the joining of the service of the University and, therefore, learned Single Judge has grossly erred by granting him the benefit of three years. He has further argued that clause 17.1.0 of the notification of the UGC was substituted by para 19 of the notification of the Financial Commissioner and Secretary to Government Haryana, Education Department, dated 13.5.1999/7.6.1999 and the aforesaid benefit granted by the UGC was deleted.

23. Dr. Gupta has further argued that the learned Single Judge has erred in placing reliance on two memos dated 24.12.2001 and 6.6.2002 issued by the Commissioner, Higher Education, Haryana (P-32 and P-33) for holding the petitioner-respondent entitled to count the entire past service rendered by him in different institutions before joining the appellant University for pension and
gratuity. Likewise, he has argued that no reliance could be placed upon memo dated 6.6.2002 because the petitioner-respondent had duly taken all his benefits with regard to the past service wherever the same was rendered by him. In any case, the employer s CPF share was never transferred to the appellant University, therefore, the petitioner-respondent was in no case entitled to counting of past service from 1965 to 1977 on the basis of aforementioned two memos.

24. The petitioner-respondent Dr. Jahan Singh has argued his case in person. He submitted that he had retired on superannuation on 31.1.2000 and over nine years have gone by. According to him all the benefits have been rightly granted by the learned Single Judge.

He has submitted that he is entitled to all the following benefits:

i. To count total period of nine years two months of the following service for pension, gratuity and
other retiral benefits, namely:

a) Lecturer in Physics, Regional Engineering College, Kurukshetra w.e.f. 1.12.1965 to 9.10.1967.

b) Lecturer in Physics, Panjab University Post Graduate Centre, Rohtak, w.e.f. 5.9.1970 to 30.9.1973.

c) Assistant Director (Class-I), Forensic Science Laboratory Haryana, Madhuban (Karnal) w.e.f. 1.10.1973 to 20.7.1977.

d) Lecturer in Physics, Kurukshetra University, Kurukshetra w.e.f. 21.7.1977 to 18.10.1977.

ii. To grant three years service for retiral benefit as notification dated 24.12.1998, which has been
rightly relied upon by the learned Single Judge (impugned judgment in LPA Nos. 45 and 46 of
2006).

iii. The Maharshi Dayanand University Pension Rules/Pension Scheme have been published in
M.D.U. Calendar Vol. III (2002) [pages 178 to 186]. After clause 4(iii) at page 181 of the said
pension scheme, the benefits have been granted.

25. He has also submitted that he has been subjected to a discriminatory treatment as person similar to him have been given benefits by counting service spent in other Universities. He has cited the example of Dr. Sarabjit Singh, Dr. O.P. Aggarwal, Dr. M.G. Gandhi, Dr. Y.V. Dahiya and Dr. K.C. Bhardwaj.

26. With respect to other writ petition, the petitionerrespondent has argued that he is entitled to payment of revised salary in the grade of Professor in the pay scale of Rs. 16400-22400 w.e.f.
1.1.1996 to 31.1.2000 till the date of his retirement as per the recommendation made by the 5 th Pay Commission. He has submitted that the arrears of his retiral benefits of pension and gratuity etc. be also revised accordingly. The petitioner-respondent has also claimed salary for the discharge of his duty as Professor w.e.f. 19.2.1991 to 31.1.2000, as he has been duly shown promoted as Professor w.e.f. 31.3.1986. In that regard he has placed reliance on a Division Bench
judgment of this Court rendered on 27.1.2000 in CWP No. 5093 of 1999 (Annexure P-32 with LPA No. 45 of 2006). According to the petitioner-respondent, SLP (C) No. 10849 of 2000 against the aforesaid order stand dismissed on 6.11.2000 (Annexure P-33 with LPA No. 45 of 2006). The petitioner-respondent has also asserted that his claim for counting extra ordinary leave as qualifying service for the purpose of pension as well as for his promotion as Professor, should also be granted to him, which is for the period from 30.11.1983 to 14.8.1985 when he worked in the Department of Physics, University of Zambia, Lusaka (South Africa). In that regard he has placed reliance on the UGC Promotion Guidelines dated 23.11.1982, which were accepted by the Executive Council of the appellant-University on 19.2.1984. He has reiterated the argument concerning discrimination by citing various examples.

27. We have bestowed our thoughtful consideration on the whole controversy and are left with an impression that the petitionerrespondent has not been treated fairly at the hands of the appellantUniversity. It is high time for the appellant-University to shun bureaucratic approach and deal with its teachers fairly. The judgment rendered in CWP No. 7180 of 1999 allowed by the learned Single Judge on 18.5.2005, is subject matter of challenge in LPA No. 27 of 2006. In that petition the petitioner-respondent has asked for the relief of (a) counting his service rendered by him at Regional Engineering College, Kurukshetra as qualifying service for retrial benefit i.e. from 1.12.1965 to 9.10.1967. He has also prayed for similar benefits from 5.7.1970 to 30.9.1973 in lieu of service rendered by him at the then Panjab University Post Graduate Regional Centre, Rohtak; from 1.10.1973 to 20.7.1977 for service rendered as Assistant Director, Haryana Police Forensic Science Laboratory, Madhuban (Karnal); and for further service rendered at Kurukshetra University, Kurukshetra from 21.7.1977 to 18.10.1977.

28. The petitioner-respondent has also relied upon clause 17 of a notification issued by the UGC on 24.12.1998 as well as another notification dated 24.12.2001 issued by the Haryana Government.

The relevant clauses of these notifications read as under:-

Portion of UGC Notification dated 24.12.1998 17.0.0 SUPERANNUATION BENEFITS
17.1.0 The benefit in service, upto a maximum of 3 years, should be provided for the teachers
who have acquired Ph.D. degree at the time of entry, so that almost all teachers get full
retirement benefits which are available after 33 years of service, subject to the overall age of superannuation. 17.2.0 Other conditions with respect to Superannuation Benefits may be given as
per Central/State Government Rules.

Haryana Government Notification dated 24.12.2001 Subject: Implementation of Pension Scheme in M.D.U. Rohtak.

The State Govt. has considered and agreed for counting of service rendered by the employees of the University in Punjab University/Kurukshetra University/ M.D. University as qualifying service for the purpose of pension subject to the following terms and conditions:-

1- The service rendered by the said employees in these institutions is without any break and is
continuous.

2- That the employer s share of the CPF in respect of these employees has been transferred to the
pension fund even with respect to the service rendered in Punjab University/Kurukshetra University as required under the pension rules of the University. Further, that all other
requirement of the pension rules are fulfilled in respect of these employees. Kindly take
necessary action accordingly.

29. At this stage it would also be pertinent to refer to the Maharshi Dayanand University Employees Pension Scheme, 1997 (for brevity, the Pension Scheme ) as contained in Chapter-XLVIII of the Maharshi Dayanand University Calendar, Volume-III (2002). Relevant clauses of the Pension Scheme i.e. 2(viii), 4(i), (ii) and (vii) are reproduced as under:-

2. Definition: Unless there be anything repugnant in the subject or context, the terms in these rules carry the meaning as under:-

viii) Competent Authority

a) Executive Council of the University would be competent to adopt the Pension rules for Maharshi Dayanand University Employees as approved by the State Govt.

b) Competent authority means the authority competent to sanction pension to the mployees of University. Competent authority for the purpose of this scheme will be Vice-Chancellor of the University. He may further delegate his powers to sanction the Pensionary benefits to the persons not less than a rank of Registrar in the University.

c) Any change(s) in grant of pensionary benefits as made by the Haryana Govt. to its employees from time to time shall be made applicable to the University employees with the approval of the Vice-Chancellor.

4. Qualifying Service:
i) All service interrupted or continuous paid by the University and for which University share is
contributed towards Pension Fund shall be treated as qualifying service. The period of break shall be omitted while working out aggregate service.

ii) E.O.L. (Without Pay) counted towards increment under rule 4.9(b)(ii) of Pb. C.S.R. Vol. I, Part-I will be counted towards service qualifying for pension, provided that University contributes its share towards pension fund for this period.

iii) to vi) x
vii) The period of service rendered by an employee in any State Govt. or Govt. aided Private College or in any University/Autonomous body against aided post prior to joining in the University shall not count as qualifying service for pensionary benefits.

However, as per Haryana Finance Dept. letter No. 1/2(4) 96-2 FR-II dated 7.1.2002, the cases for the purpose of grant of benefit of past qualifying service towards pension to the State Government
Employees going over to State Autonomous Body or vice versa and employees of State Autonomous Body moving to another Autonomous Body (both under the Govt. of Haryana), will be regulated as per the provisions contained herein.

Definition of Statutory Body/Autonomous Body:-

In order to be eligible for the benefits under this officer Memorandum, an employee must have
rendered service in a State Autonomous/Statutory Body:

i) that has been created under a Statute/Act of a State/Central Government; and

ii) is financed wholly or substantially from the cess or Central/State Government grants substantially means that more than 50% of the expenditure of the Autonomous Bodies is met through cess or Central/State Government grants.

EXPLANATION:
A State Autonomous Bodies includes a State University but does not include a Public Sector
undertaking/Public Enterprise/Company registered under the companies Act/Society registered under the Societies Registration Act/and private bodies and managements. (emphasis added)
30. A perusal of clause 4(i) of the Pension Scheme framed by the appellant University postulates that all service interrupted or continuous paid by the University and for which University share is
contributed towards Pension Fund, must be treated as qualifying service. It further clarifies that the period of break must be omitted while working out aggregate service. In respect of Extra Ordinary Leave (EOL), which is ordinarily without pay, it has been provided that such period of EOL which is counted towards increment under Rule 4.9(b)(ii) of the Punjab C.S.R. Volume-I, Part-I, could also be counted towards qualifying service for pension. Sub-clause (vii) of clause (4) of the Pension Scheme adopts a letter of Haryana Government, dated 7.1.2002, which is squarely applicable to the case of the petitioner-respondent. Perusal of clause 4(vii) of the Penshion
Scheme show that the period of service rendered by an employee in any State Government or a Government Aided Private College or in any University, Autonomous Body against aided post prior to joining in the University is not to be counted as qualifying service for pensionary benefit.

However, sub-clause (vii) refers to the Finance Department letter dated 7.1.2002, which regulate counting of qualifying service towards pension in respect of State Government employees going over to State Autonomous Body or vice-versa. In the definition of Statutory Body/Autonomous Body it has been clarified that such a body might be created under a Statute/Act of a State/Central Government and is financed wholly or substantially by the Central/State Government grants. The explanation further clarifies that State Autonomous Body would include State University but are not to include the Public Sector Undertaking or the Company registered under the Companies Act. This letter covers the case of the petitioner-respondent because the service rendered by the petitionerrespondent is either to the Regional Engineering College,
Kurukshetra or Panjab University or the Forensic Science Laboratory, Madhuban, which is a Government Department, or the appellant University. It is, thus, obvious that the whole service rendered by the petitioner-respondent would qualify for pensionary and other retrial benefits.

Accordingly, we endorse the view taken by the learned Single Judge and hold the petitioner-respondent entitled to the benefit in respect of the period specified in the preceding paras.

31. The argument of Dr. Balram Gupta that sub-clause (vii) of clause 4 of the Pension Scheme, in fact, exclude the whole service and dis-entitled the petitioner-respondent from making any such
claim, has failed to impress us because it is obvious from the Pension Scheme that letter dated 7.1.2002 would entitle the petitionerrespondent to claim all such benefits. In such like matters, Hon ble the Supreme Court has repeatedly recommended for adopting a liberal approach. In that regard reliance is placed on the judgment of Hon ble the Supreme Court rendered in the case of D. S. Nakara v. Union of India, AIR1983 SC 130. The other argument of Dr. Gupta in this regard that the petitioner-respondent might have obtained benefit of Contributory Provident Fund, also does not cut any ice in view of the specific statement made by Dr. Jahan Singh that he has not obtained any such benefit. Even otherwise if any such benefit has been obtained then it would not dis-entitle the petitioner-respondent from counting of that period as qualifying service because adjustment in accounting could always be made by the appellant-University while calculating the amount due to the petitioner-respondent.

32. We also approve the view taken by the learned Single Judge on the basis of notification dated 24.12.2001 (supra), which postulate that the service rendered by the employees of the Maharshi
Dayanand University, the Panjab University/Kurukshetra University was to be considered as qualifying service for the purpose of pension.

The provision has to be read with sub-clause (i) of clause (4) of the Pension Scheme, which provides that all service interrupted or continuous has to be treated as qualifying service for the purpose of pension and the break have to be ignored while working out aggregate service. The petitioner-respondent admittedly has rendered service from 1.12.1965 to 9.10.1967 as Lecturer in Physics at the Regional Engineering College, Kurukshetra and he was a confirmed Lecturer in Physics at the Panjab University Post Graduate Regional Centre from 5.7.1970 to 30.9.1973. The gap from October 1967 to June 1970 would be condonable in view of the fact that he was working as a Research Assistant in the Department of Physics, University of Birmingham, England. From the post of Lecturer he went on to join as Assistant Director, Forensic Science Laboratory,
Madhuban (Karnal) and worked there w.e.f. 1.10.1973 to 20.7.1977.

He also worked for about three months as Lecturer at Kurukshetra University, Kurukshetra from 21.7.1977 to 18.10.1977. Thereafter, he was appointed as Reader in Physics at the appellant-University on 19.10.1977. Therefore, by reading clause 4(i) of the Pension Scheme with letter/notification dated 24.12.2001 it cannot be said that the petitioner-respondent would not be entitled to counting the aforesaid period as qualifying service for the purpose of pension and other
retiral benefits.

33. The learned Single Judge has also adopted correct approach by placing reliance on clause 17 of the UGC notification dated 24.12.1998, which has already been reproduced in para 27 above. It is also not in dispute that the Haryana Government accepted the revision of pay scale in respect of the University and College teachers. Clause 17.1.0 in clear terms postulate that three years benefit be provided to the teachers who have acquired Ph.D. degree at the time of entry into service so as to enable them to get full retrial benefits, which are available after 33 years of service, subject to the overall age of superannuation. Accordingly, the petitionerrespondent would be entitled to the aforesaid benefits, as has been rightly held by the learned Single Judge, particularly in view of the
judgment of Hon ble the Supreme Court rendered in the case of University of Delhi v. Raj Singh, AIR 1995 SC 336. According to the ratio of the aforesaid judgment the notifications issued by the
UGC are binding on the Universities.

34. The relief granted by the Division Bench while deciding C.W.P. No. 5093 of 1999, has to be granted to the petitionerrespondent. The Division Bench in unmistakable terms has issued direction to the appellant-University to re-fix the pay of the petitioner-respondent from 20.6.1979 till 4.10.1983 by treating him in service and granting him benefit of annual increments which he
would have earned during that period. The aforesaid direction was issued in pursuance to the resolution passed by the Executive Council condoning the break in service and the SLP (C) No. 10849 of 2000 was dismissed. The Division Bench had also issued direction to refix his pay for the period after he was re-appointed till the date of his promotion as Professor and pay him arrears of pay for that period.

The Division Bench clarified that the petitioner-respondent was not to be paid any arrears of pay for the period from 20.6.1979 to 4.10.1983.

However, he was held entitled to all the consequential retiral benefits i.e. pension and gratuity on the assumption that he was in service for the aforesaid break period. The arrears were required to be paid to the petitioner-respondent within a period of one month with interest @ 15% per annum.

The aforesaid relief granted by the learned Single Judge based on the Division Bench judgment cannot possibly be open to challenge and the argument contrary to the aforesaid view, raised by Dr. Gupta, are hereby rejected.

35. There is only one aspect which remained to be noticed in view of the judgment rendered by Hon ble the Supreme Court in the case of Vice Chancellor, M.D. University, Rohtak v. Dr. Jahan
Singh, (2007) 3 SLR 381. Dr. Jahan Singh had pointed out that factual background noticed for reaching the aforesaid conclusion by Hon ble the Supreme Court was not correctly placed before their Lordships , inasmuch as, the petitioner-respondent has been considered to be in service as Reader in Physics since 19.10.1977 at the appellant-University, although his services were terminated w.e.f. 20.6.1979. Be that as it may, we cannot go into that aspect. The matter has been concluded by their Lordships of the Supreme Court and the judgment in LPA No. 2 of 2002 has been reversed.

Accordingly the writ petition filed by the petitioner-respondent was dismissed. It is appropriate to mention that the petitioner-respondent has sought direction for implementation of the letter dated 6.2.1995 issued by the appellant-University in terms of clause 26(c) of the Leave Regulations of the Maharshi Dayanand University Calendar Volume-III (1991). Further relief was sought for counting extra ordinary leave period towards annual increments by declaring the Vice-Chancellor s notification dated 2.4.1998 as unjust and contrary to the law. Hon ble the Supreme Court has held that the petitionerrespondent could have become entitled to the benefits despite grant of extra ordinary leave in terms of Regulation 26(ii) had he fulfilled all the conditions. He did not fulfill those conditions, therefore, withdrawal of increments, arising from extra ordinary leave, were upheld. In so far as the period of extra ordinary leave for pension is concerned, the same was not scope of the dispute raised before this Court in LPA No. 2 of 2002, which eventually reached Hon ble the Supreme Court.

36. For the reasons stated above, LPA Nos. 27, 45 and 46 of 2006 are hereby dismissed with the only modification that the petitioner-respondent would not be entitled to the increments emerging from the extra ordinary leave in respect of the period when he worked at the University of Zambia, Lusaka (South Africa) from 30.11.1983 to 14.8.1985

37. We hope and trust that with the dismissal of the LPAs, all controversies between the appellant-University and the petitionerrespondent would come to an end and the petitioner-respondent who is already a senior citizen may be allowed to live in peace in the evenings of his life. He had retired more than nine years ago and still clamouring for payment of his dues. Accordingly, we direct that all his dues be settled within a period of two months from the date of
receipt of a certified copy of this order.

(M.M. KUMAR)
JUDGE

(H.S. BHALLA)
JUDGE


ROSHNI DEVI Vs MAHARSHI DAYANAND UNIVERSITY ROHTAK AND ANOTHER
Tuesday, 1st September, 2009
CWP No.3927 of 1989

In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh.

Date of decision: 01.09.2009

Roshni Devi
Vs.
Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak and another.

CORAM:
HONBLE MR. JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI

Present:
None for the parties.

PERMOD KOHLI, J. (Oral):
I have gone through the file.

This petition was directed to be heard along with CWP No.4989 of 1989. The record of the aforesaid writ petition was called for, wherein the following order has been passed:-

For the reasons recorded in CWP No.11741 of 1988 (Trilochan Singh V. M.D. University and another), this petition is allowed in the same terms with no order as to costs.

CWP No.4989 was disposed of in terms of the order passed in CWP No.11741 of 1988. The file of CWP No.11741 of 1988 was also called for. The aforesaid writ petition has been allowed vide
order dated 30.05.1989, with the following direction:-

For the reasons recorded above, all the writ petitions are allowed with no order as to costs directing the respondents to regularise the admission of the petitioners in B.Ed. Correspondence Course and to declare their result as they have taken the final examination which is being held.

The present petition is allowed in terms of the judgment aforesaid. No costs.

(PERMOD KOHLI)
JUDGE


DR SHALINI AGGARWAL Vs SH JIWAN RAM GOYAL AND ANOTHER
Friday, 21st August, 2009
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

C.O.C.P. No. 346 of 2009 (O and M)

Date of decision: 21.08.2009

Dr. Shalini Aggarwal ….Petitioner
Versus
Sh. Jiwan Ram Goyal and another ….Respondents

CORAM:
HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD K. SHARMA

Present: -
Mr. R.K. Malik, Sr. Advocate, with
Mr. Vishal Malik, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. Santosh Sharma and
Mr. Akshay Bhan, Advocates, for respondent No. 1.
Mr. Kartar Singh, AAG, Haryana, for respondent No. 2.

VINOD K. SHARMA, J (ORAL)
CM No. 19479-CII of 2009 Allowed. Additional affidavit on behalf of respondent No. 1 is taken on record.

CM No. 19480-CII of 2009
Allowed. Applicant-respondent No. 1 is exempted from filing the certified copies of Annexure R-4 and R-5.C.O.C.P. No. 346 of 2009 (O and M) The petitioner has invoked the contempt jurisdiction of this
Court for punishing the respondents for having committed contempt of this Court, for not filling up the post of Lecturer in History. The order passed by this Court reads as under: -

Counsel for the petitioner states that in view of letter dated June 17, 2008, issued by the Assistant Director, Colleges-II, for Higher Education Commissioner, Haryana, Panchkula, this writ petition has become infructuous. Copy of the order has been placed on record. In view of letter now issued, the respondents are directed to finalize the process of selection, as per norms, within a reasonable time.

Disposed of accordingly.

An additional affidavit has been placed on record, wherein respondent No. 1 has averred that process of selection has already
commenced. The affidavit filed reads as under: -

1. That at the outset the present answering respondent wants to submit that he is having the highest regards towards this Honble court and wants to tender his unconditional apology if he is found to be guilty of any disobedience of orders by this Honble Court.

2. That the present a idavit is being filed in pursuance to the liberty given by this Honble court vide order dated 30.07.2009 to explain the latest situation regarding filling up the post of Lecturer in History by the present deponent.

3. That in this regard, it is submitted that as explained vide earlier affidavit by the present deponent dated 29.05.2009 vide Annexure R-3
post was duly advertised in the news paper for the purpose of filling up the post of Lecturer of History that as subsequent to advertisement Annexure R-3 dated 22.05.2009, the present deponent issued corrigendum/requirement to the earlier advertisement on 26.07.2009 in the two leading news papers i.e. Denik Jagran in Hindi and The Tribune of English as the present deponent received a letter dated 17.7.2009 from Higher Education Commissioner vide which it has been provided that the candidates who have acquired Ph.D. upto 31 st May 2009 shall also be exempted from the requirement of the minimum eligibility condition of NET/SLET for recruitment and
appointment to the posts of Lecturers or equivalent position in Universities/Colleges/Institutions. A copy of corrigendum dated 26.07.2009 is annexed herewith as Annexure R-4.

4. That as submitted in the earlier affidavit to the effect that the respondent College of which the present deponent is Chairman is grant in aid college and the posts are to be filled up by the Selection Committee which is to be constituted as per rules and regulations and the present deponent even vide letter dated 12.8.2009 has written to the Dean College Development Council M.D. University, Rohtak for appointment of V.C. Nominee and penal of subject expert for the
appointment of Lecturer in History against vacant sanctioned post. A copy of letter dated 12.8.2009 is annexed herewith as Annexure R-5.

5. That in view of the aforementioned submissions, it is quite clear that process of filing up the post of Lecturer in History is under process and the present deponent is to sit in the Selection Committee only as one of the member out of total eight members i.e. Chairman of the Selection Committee, two V.C. Nominee, Higher Education Commissioner, nominee, subject expert, Higher Education subject expert, Management subject expert and Principal of the College in the said Selection Committee.

6. That the deponent fully ensures this Honble court and states with full sense of responsibility that there is no delay on the part of present answering deponent in filling up the post of Lecturer in History and as and when after selection committee will be constituted, the present deponent will ensure that the selection to the post of Lecturer in History will be done forthwith.

In view of the position explained above, the order passed by this Court stands complied with. The respondents cannot be said to be
guilty of violating any order.

Rule discharged.

(Vinod K. Sharma)
Judge


STATE OF HARYANA THROUGH COLLECTOR ROHTAKVsR M S MALIK AND ANOTHER
Wednesday, 23rd September, 2009
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

R.S.A.No.1536 of 2009

Date of decision:23rd September, 2009

State of Haryana through Collector, Rohtak ……..Appellants
Versus
R.M.S.Malik and another ……..Respondents

Before:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIVE BHALLA

Present:
Mr. Himanshu Raj, Advocate for the appellants.
Mr. D.R.Bansal, Advocate for respondent no. 1.

Rajive Bhalla, J.(Oral)
The State of Haryana challenges the judgments and decrees dated 31.07.2008 and 11.11.2008, passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Rohtak and the District Judge, Rohtak, decreeing the suit filed by respondent no. 1 and dismissing their appeal.

The plaintiff-respondent no. 1 filed a suit for declaration, praying that he is entitled to selection grade, senior grade, ACP scale and promotion as a professor. Respondent no. 1 pleaded that he had joined service in the year 1969 as a lecturer and was sent on deputation to the Maharishi Dayanand University, Rohtak, w.e.f. 10.09.1991. After retirement on 8.11.2001, though his services were absorbed by the University, he is entitled to selection grade, senior grade, ACP scale etc. for the period 10.09.1991 to 12.03.2001, when he remained an employee of the State of Haryana. It was further prayed that the adverse remarks for the reporting period 12.07.1989 to 31.01.1990 be quashed.

Upon notice, the State of Haryana, filed a reply denying that the plaintiff-respondent no. 1 is entitled to any relief by asserting that in view of the adverse remarks in his annual confidential report, the plaintiff-respondent no. 1 is not entitled to senior or selection grades. Respondent no. 2 filed a written statement denying that respondent no. 1 is entitled to any promotion.

On the basis of the pleadings, the trial court framed the following issues:-

1. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to get expunged adverse remarks from his ACR for the year 1989-90? OPP

2. Whether the plaintiff is entitled for the senior grade w.e.f. 1990 and selection grade w.e.f.1998 alongwith regular satisfactory service? OPP

3. Whether the plaintiff is entitled from retrial benefits w.e.f. 13.3.2001 alongwith promotion as Professor and other outstanding dues? OPP.

4. Whether the suit of the plaintiff is not maintainable in the present form and the plaintiff has concealed the material facts from the court and this court has no jurisdiction? OPD

5. Relief.

During the pendency of the suit, the appellant granted the benefit of senior and selection grades w.e.f. 3.09.1990 and 27.07.1998, respectively to respondent no. 1 and paid arrears of Rs. 44183/- vide cheque dated 12.02.2004. In addition, vide order dated 2.09.2003, the adverse remarks recorded against respondent no. 1, were expunged and Rs. 11,42,302/-, due to the plaintiff-respondent no. 1 on 13.03.2001, as gratuity and pro-rata pension were paid on 10.04.2006. In view of these facts, the trial court held that the State of Haryana is required to pay interest @9% per annum, on the delayed payment of these amounts. Respondent no. 1's prayer for other benefits and promotion to the post of professor was rejected.

Aggrieved by the aforementioned judgment and decree, the State of Haryana filed an appeal. Vide judgment and decree dated 11.11.2008, the District Judge, Rohtak, dismissed the appeal and affirmed the findings recorded by the trial court.

Counsel for the appellant submits that the judgments and decrees passed by the courts below are illegal and void. The delay if any, was on the part of respondent no. 1, as he filed a representation against the adverse remarks, only on 30.09.1999 and therefore, respondent no. 1 is not entitled to any interest and then also @10% per annum.

Counsel for respondent no. 1 submits that he has no objection, if the interest is reduced to 6% per annum. As regards the other arguments, it is submitted that the adverse remarks were never conveyed to respondent no. 1 and when conveyed he filed a representation which was accepted. The adverse remarks were eventually expunged on 22.09.2003. The courts below, therefore, rightly directed the appellants to pay interest on the arrears of salary, the pro rata pension and gratuity, which were wrongly withheld by the State of Haryana.

I have heard counsel for the parties, perused the impugned judgments and decrees, considered the arguments addressed by counsel for the parties and appraised the questions of law which relate to the award of interest.

Admittedly, during the pendency of the suit, the State of Haryana accepted the claim of respondent no. 1, expunged the adverse remarks, paid arrears on account of salary and pro rata pension and gratuity. As a consequence, the courts below did not commit any error in awarding interest on the delayed payments of salary, the pro rata pension and gratuity as no reasons whatsoever, has been assigned for withholding these amounts.

However, as counsel for respondent no. 1 has no objection, if the interest is reduced from 9% to 6% per annum, the judgments and decrees passed by the courts below are modified to the extent that the amount paid to respondent no. 1 shall be paid with interest @6% per annum.

The appeal is dismissed with the aforementioned modification with no order as to costs.

[RAJIVE BHALLA]
JUDGE


RACHNA MALIKVsMAHARSHI DAYANAND UNIVERSITY ROHTAK AND OTHERS
Thursday, 17th September, 2009
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

C.W.P. No. 14495 of 2009

DATE OF DECISION : 17.09.2009

Rachna Malik …. PETITIONER
Versus
Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak and others ….. RESPONDENTS

CORAM :-
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL

Present:
Dr. Suresh Kumar Redhu, Advocate, for the petitioner.

SATISH KUMAR MITTAL , J.
The petitioner was one of the applicants to the post of Assistant Teacher Arts and Drawing in University Campus School, Rohtak, which was advertised vide advertisement No.3/2008 (Annexure P-1). She has filed the instant petition challenging the selection of respondent No.3 on the said post.

It is the case of the petitioner that the Selection Committee, without adopting any criteria for selection, has selected respondent No.3, while ignoring the academic qualification and teaching experience of the petitioner. In this regard, it is stated that the petitioner passed her M.A. Fine Arts by securing 74.7% marks, whereas respondent No.3 has passed her MA Fine Arts only with 64.5% marks. It is also stated that the petitioner is having 4 ½ years teaching experience as a Fine Arts Teacher in a private school and is also pursuing her Ph.D., from Chaudhary Charan Singh University, Meerut in Fine Arts. On the other hand, respondent No.3 does not possess any teaching experience.

Therefore, it is contended that the petitioner is more meritorious than respondent No.3, who has been arbitrarily selected on the post.

I have heard counsel for the petitioner.

Admittedly, as per the advertisement, a candidate applying for the post of Assistant Teacher Arts and Drawing was required to possess the following academic qualifications :

1. Higher Secondary/Intermediate/Sr. School Certificate Exam. With minimum 4 years (Full time diploma in Painting/Fine Art from a recognized Institute/University.

2. B.A with drawing and painting/art/fine art with minimum 2 years (full
time) diploma from a recognized Institute.

3. M.A in Drawing and painting/Fine Arts from a recognized University.

4. B.A. (Hons.) in Art and Art Education, Jamia Milia Islamia, New Delhi.

Concededly, no experience was required for the post in question. It is also conceded position that respondent No.3 possessed the requisite academic qualifications. Therefore, it cannot be said that respondent No.3, who has been selected on the post, is not possessing the requisite qualifications.

Merely because the petitioner has passed the MA Fine Arts by securing
more marks or she is having some experience, it cannot be presumed that she is more meritorious than the selected candidate. The Selection
Committee has selected respondent No.3 on the basis of the assessment made by it during the interview. There is no allegation of malafide against the Selection Committee. Merely on the basis that the petitioner secured higher marks and was possessing some experience, it cannot be said that the selection was vitiated or illegal. Regarding the contention of the petitioner that no criteria was laid down by the Selection Committee, the petitioner cannot be permitted to raise this point, in view of the principle of estoppel.

In Amlan Jyoti Borooah Versus State of Assam and others, (2009) 3
Supreme Court Cases, 227, it was held that a candidate, who had subjected himself to a faulty selection process could not be permitted to question the same later on. Even otherwise, I do not find any fault in the selection process.

No merit.

Dismissed.

( SATISH KUMAR MITTAL )
JUDGE


RAMESHVsS P VATS REGISTRAR MD UNIVERSITY ROHTAK
Wednesday, 16th September, 2009
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

C.O.C.P.No.996 of 2009 (O and M)

Date of Decision:-16.9.2009

Ramesh …Petitioner
Versus
S.P.Vats, Registrar, MD University, Rohtak …Respondent

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG

Present:
Mr.S.P.Chahar, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr.B.L.Gupta, Advocate for the respondent.

Rakesh Kumar Garg, J. (Oral):
CM No.22102-CII of 2009
Application is allowed subject to all just exceptions.

Reply by way of affidavit of S.P.Vats-respondent is taken on record.

COCP No.996 of 2009
Learned counsel for the petitioner does not wish to press the present petition. Ordered accordingly.

Rule discharged.

(Rakesh Kumar Garg)
Judge


SATYAWAN Vs MAHARISHI DAYANAND UNIVERSITY ROHTAK CWP 17414 of 2008
Wednesday, 1st October, 2008
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB and HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Date of decision : October 1, 2008

Satyawan ……….Petitioner
Versus
Maharishi Dayanand University, Rohtak ………..Respondents

CORAM:
HONBLE MR. JUSTICE M.M KUMAR
HONBLE MR. JUSTICE JORA SINGH

Present:
Mr. S.P Chahar, Advocate for the petitioner.

1.Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see the judgment?
2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?
3.Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest?

M.M KUMAR, J.
Through this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner has prayed for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to confirm the services of the petitioner on his regularised post in compliance of his regularisation order dated 4.1.2005 (Annexure P-2).

We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners at some length and perused the paper book.

Before disposing of this writ petition, we would refer to the views of Honble the Supreme Court in the case of Salem Advocate Bar Association v. Union of India, (2005) 6 SCC 344. In paras 38 and 39 of the judgment, it has been required that whenever notice under Section 80 C.P.C or under any similar provision are sent then it is mandatory on the part of State or Central Government or other authorities to send reply to such notice. It is well settled that before seeking a direction or a writ of mandamus, a demand justice notice is required to be served on the respondents as has been done in the
present case. The petitioner has already sent a legal notice dated 30.1.2006 (Annexure P-5), to which no reply is stated to have been received. It has also been observed by Honble the Supreme Court that in cases where such like notice/representation has not been replied then cost is required to be imposed. Therefore, without going into the merits of the case, we dispose of the writ petition at this stage with a direction to the respondents to take a decision on the aforementioned legal notice by passing a speaking order within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of
this order.

Petition stands disposed of in the above terms.

( M.M KUMAR )
JUDGE

( JORA SINGH )
JUDGE


DURGESH Vs STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS Civil Writ Petition 5643 of 2008
Monday, 18th August, 2008
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

Date of decision: August 18 2008

Durgesh —–Petitioner
Vs.
State of Haryana and others —–Respondents

CORAM:-
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR GARG

Present:
Mr. Manoj Chahal Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. SK Monga Advocate for respondent Nos. 1 and 2.
Mr. Akshay Goyal Advocate for respondent No.4.

Adarsh Kumar Goel J.
1. This petition seeks quashing of advertisement dated 7.11.2007 Annexure P.2 in respect of post of Lecturer in Education (Psychology).

2. Grievance of the petitioner is that in the said
advertisement alternative qualification prescribed does not require Post Graduation in Psychology as was in the case of earlier advertisement dated 21.9.2007 Annexure P.1. It is submitted that this was arbitrary as Psychology was a necessary retirement for the post of Lecturer in Education (Psychology).

CWP No.5643 of 2008
3. Stand of respondent No.4 is that advertisement is in accordance with the University norms approved vide resolution No.16 of the meeting of Executive Council of the Maharshi Dayanand University Rohtak held on 27.9.2006. The qualification of M.Ed by itself covers Psychology subject. Reference has also been made to UGC recommendations. It has been further stated as
under:-

It had also been clarified by the University that the post of Lecturer is for Education and not for the Psychology subject alone i.e. not for teaching the subject of Psychology. It is further submitted that there is no subject of Psychology for the students of B.Ed rather there is one paper of 100 marks (Theory- 80+Practical-20) of Psychology of Teaching and Learning which is to be taught by a Lecturer having Master’s Degree in Education. The word within bracket Psychology is mentioned just to signify that the Lecturer besides teaching other subjects would be allotted the paper/subject of Psychology of Teaching and Learning. So the University by introducing the
qualification as MA in a school subject rather than having qualification of MA(Psychology) only had widened the scope of applying for the post of Lecturer in Education. It is necessary to point out here that there is no independent sanctioned post of Lecturer in the subject of Psychology alone in the institution of the answering respondent. All the posts are of Lecturers in Education. Hence the answering respondent re-advertised the post in compliance with the provisions of Rule 6 of the ibid rules mentioning
therein the qualifications as recommended by the
University.

4. In view of explanation furnished by respondent No.4 in its reply we are unable to hold that laying down of qualification in the advertisement was in any manner arbitrary.

5. The writ petition is dismissed.

(Adarsh Kumar Goel)
Judge

(Rakesh Kumar Garg)
Judge


RAJESH Vs M D U AND ANR CWP 6449 of 2008
Thursday, 10th July, 2008
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

Date of Decision:10.07.2008.

Rajesh…Petitioner.
Versus
Mahrishi Dayanand University and another …Respondents.

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA.

Present:
Mr.Puneet Gupta Advocate for the petitioner.
Dr.Balram Gupta Senior Advocate with
Mr.Pankaj Sharma Advocate for the respondents.

ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA J. (ORAL)
Counsel for the petitioner states that this writ petition has been rendered infructuous as fresh order has been passed re-affirming the
earlier order dated 02.04.2008 (Annexure P-5) after hearing the petitioner.

He further submits that as the fresh order is appealable therefore he
would like to file an appeal against the order affirming the earlier order
dated 2.4.2008.

In view of the statement made by counsel for the petitioner the writ petition is dismissed as having been rendered infructuous.

(ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA)
JUDGE

(KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA)
JUDGE


SANDEEP KUMAR Vs MAHARSHI DAYANAND UNIVERSITY ROHTAK and ETC Civil Writ Petition 11297 of 2008
Friday, 4th July, 2008
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Date of decision: 4th July 2008

Sandeep Kumar … Petitioner
Versus
Maharishi Dahanand University and others … Respondents

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA

Present:
Mr. Ashwani Verma Advocate for the petitioner.
Dr. Balram Gupta Senior Advocate with
Mr. Pankaj Sharma Advocate for the University.
Mr. D.S.Nalwa DAG Haryana for the State.

KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA J.
For orders see detailed order of even date passed in Civil Writ Petition No. 11068 of 2008.

[KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA]
JUDGE

[ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA]
JUDGE


NIKHIL Vs M D U AND ORS Civil Writ Petition 11068 of 2008
Friday, 4th July, 2008
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Date of decision: 4th July 2008

Nikhil … Petitioner
Versus
Maharishi Dahanand University and others … Respondents

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA

Present:
Mr. Sanjiv Gupta Advocate for the petitioner.
Dr. Balram Gupta Senior Advocate with
Mr. Pankaj Sharma Advocate for the University.
Mr. D.S.Nalwa DAG Haryana for the State.

KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA J.
This order shall dispose off CWP No. 11068 of 2008 11297 of 2008 11093 of 2008 and 11110 of 2008.

While issuing notice of motion we had passed the following order:

The petitioner is aggrieved by the action of the Maharishi Dayanand University Rohtak vide which the application form of the petitioner for the PMT Entrance Test has been rejected as his application was received after the last date of submission.

The petitioner applied for PMT Entrance Test on 14.6.2008. The application was sent through Registered Speed Post vide Annexure P-2. The last date for submission of the application was 17.6.2008.

The application of the petitioner was received by the University after the due date.

Counsel for the petitioner contends that as the petitioner had sent his application form through Registered Speed Post on 14.6.2008 hence he cannot be held responsible in case of any delay. A perusal of Chapter 9 of Clause 18 of the Prospectus clearly lays down that in case any application form is received after the due date due to any reason including the postal delay the same shall not be entertained. Clause 18 is reproduced as under:

18. Application forms received after the due date and time due to any reason including postal delay will be rejected without any intimation to the candidates.

Counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on Anurag Sharma Vs. Regional Engineering College Kurukshetra reported as 1996 (1) SCT 843 wherein the delay was on part of the postal authorities this Court held that the petitioner cannot be made to suffer for any fault on part of the postal authorities. Notice of motion for 4.7.2008.

On asking of the Court Dr.Balram Gupta Sr. Advocate with Mr.Vikram Hooda Advocate accepts notice on behalf of the University.

In pursuance of the notice of motion issued by this Court Dr.Balram Gupta representing the respondent-university has put in appearance and placed reliance upon a full bench judgment of this Court rendered in Rahul Prabhakar v. Punjab Technical University Jalandhar and others 1997 (5) SLR 163 to contend that the judgment of a division bench relied upon by the petitioner Anurag Sharma (supra) has been overruled and it has been held by the full bench that delay in reaching of the application form is to be strictly construed and in view of the clear cut specific mandate laid in clause 18 of the prospectus no condonation in delay can accrue to the petitioner as postal authorities had not delivered the application form to the respondent-university as expected by the candidate.

The full bench of this Court has placed reliance upon Institute of Chartered Accountants of India v. Inder Chand Jain JT 1991(4) SC 39 and has concluded as under:

18. Validity or otherwise of the Information Brochure and its binding nature has to be examined by the generality of cases it covers and not be the inconvenience or resultant prejudice that may be caused to persons who could not strictly adhere to its terms. In this connection we consider it appropriate to recall the observations made by Krishana Iyer J. in R.S. Joshi Vs. Ajit Mills AIR 1977 Supreme Court 2279.

A law has to be adjudged for its constitutionality by the generality of cases it covers not by the freaks and exceptions it martyrs. If the argument advanced by the learned counsel is accepted or if the principles stated by the Division Bench in Saurabh Aggarwal’s case (supra) are followed then consequence will be to amend the provision contained in the Information Brochure. If the provision contained in the Information Brochure is found to be unsustainable the same can be struck down by this Court in exercise of the powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. By striking down the provision in the Brochure the petitioner will not be getting any benefit. So this Court will have to amend the provision contained in the Brochure or in other words re-write the same.

This Court is not venture such a course of action. High Court cannot assume the role of rule making authority and re-write the rule nor can this Court in exercise of the powers under Article 226 of the Constitution substitute its views to that of the competent authority which framed the Brochure.

19. In view of what has been stated above we hold that the date and time for the receipt of the application forms by the Co-ordinator CET 1997 is fixed in the Information Brochure. It is not to be altered by this Court in exercise of the powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. We also hold that law settled by a Division Bench in Saurabh Aggarwal vs. Kurukshetra University 1995 (1) S.L.R. 80 and the decision in Anurag Sharma vs Regional Engineering College Kurukshetra and others 1996 (1) RSJ 795 do not lay down the correct law and we overrule the same.

A similar question has been raised in civil writ petitions bearing No. 11297 of 2008 11093 of 2008 and 11110 of 2008 as therein also the
application form of the petitioner-candidate has reached late to the
university authorities as postal authorities failed to deliver the form before the specified cut off date and time. Therefore we need not advert to the facts of these writ petitions and they are also dismissed along with the present petition in view of the law laid down by full bench of this Court in Rahul Parbhakar’s case (supra).

It will be pertinent to mention here that a division bench of this Court to which one of us (Ashutosh Mohunta J.) was a member on a similar question of law and fact had dismissed a writ petition bearing CWP No. 10869 of 2003 titled as Gaurav Dutta and others v. State of Haryana and others where the same clause was subject matter of interpretation pertaining to respondent-Maharishi Dayanand University Rohtak. The decision rendered in Gaurav Dutta’s case (supra) was challenged in Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No.13555-13556/ 2003 Gaurav Dutta and others v. State of Haryana and the SLP preferred was dismissed by Hon'ble Apex Court on 08.12.2003.

Therefore in view of the settled legal position we cannot come to the rescue of the petitioners and consequently the writ petitions fail and are dismissed.

[KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA]
JUDGE

[ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA]
JUDGE


REENA DEVI AND OTHERS Vs MAHARISHI DAYANAND UNI ROHTAK AND OTHERS CWP 7791 of 2008
Monday, 12th May, 2008
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

DATE OF DECISION: May 12, 2008

REENA DEVI AND OTHERS …PETITIONERS
VERSUS
MAHARISHI DAYANAND UNIVERSITY, …RESPONDENTS ROHTAK AND OTHERS

CORAM:
HONBLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA.
HONBLE MR. JUSTICE T.P.S. MANN.

PRESENT:
NONE FOR THE PETITIONER.

ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA, J.(ORAL)
Case called out thrice. Counsel for the petitioner has not
bothered to appear on any of the occasions.

Dismissed for non-prosecution.

(ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA)
JUDGE

(T.P.S. MANN)
JUDGE


VIKAS CHAUHAN AND ORS Vs M D UNIVERSITY AND ORS CWP 7447 of 2008
Tuesday, 6th May, 2008
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

DATE OF DECISION: May 6, 2008

VIKAS CHAUHAN and OTHERS …PETITIONERS
VERSUS
and OTHERS …RESPONDENTS

CORAM:
HONBLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA.
HONBLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA.

PRESENT:
MR. P.L. VERMA, ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONERS.

ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA, J.(ORAL)
The petitioners have prayed that directions be issued to
respondent No.1 to declare their result of 5th Semester and further allowing them to appear in the 6th Semester examinations. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that he will be satisfied if the representations are ordered
to be decided expeditiously.

On asking of the Court, Mr. B.L. Gupta, Advocate accepts
notice on behalf of the respondents.

After hearing learned counsel for the petitioners, we dispose of this writ petition with a direction to respondent No.1 to decide the representations (Annexure P-2 and P-3) within a period of 10 days from today.

Copy of the order be given under the signatures of the Court Secretary.

(ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA)
JUDGE

(KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA)
JUDGE


ASSOCIATION OF EDUCATIONAL COLLEGES Vs MAHARISHI DAYANAND UNIV AND ANR Civil Writ Petition 4661 of 2008
Thursday, 24th April, 2008
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Date of decision: April 24, 2008

Association of Education Colleges (Self Financing) of Haryana (Regd.) … Petitioner
Versus
and another. … Respondents

CORAM:
HONBLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA
HONBLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA

Present:
Mr. Rakesh Nehra, Advocate with
Mr. Vijay Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner.
Dr. Balram Gupta, Senior Advocate with
Mr. Satish Chaudhary, Advocate for respondent No.1 (University).
Mr. V.S.Bhardwaj, Advocate for respondent No.2.

KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA , J.
For orders, see detailed order of even date, passed in CWP
No. 3312 of 2008.

[KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA]
JUDGE

[ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA]
JUDGE


ASSOC OF EDU COLLEGES Vs M D UNIVERSITY AND ANR Civil Writ Petition 3312 of 2008
Thursday, 24th April, 2008
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Date of decision: April 24, 2008

Association of Education Colleges (Self Financing) of Haryana (Regd.) … Petitioner
Versus
M.D. University, Rohtak and another. … Respondents

CORAM:
HONBLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA
HONBLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA

Present:
Mr. Rakesh Nehra, Advocate with
Mr. Vijay Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner.
Dr. Balram Gupta, Senior Advocate with
Mr. Satish Chaudhary, Advocate for respondent No.1
(University).
Mr. V.S.Bhardwaj, Advocate for respondent No.2.

KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA , J.
CWP No. 3312 of 2008 has been preferred by Association of
Education Colleges (Self Financing) of Haryana (hereinafter called petitioner-association) against M.D. University, Rohtak and National Council for Teachers Association, Jaipur, praying that respondent No.1 be directed to hold counseling for B.Ed. Course (special session 2007-08) for admitting the students in the B.Ed. Colleges, which were members of the petitioner-association.

CWP No. 4661 of 2008 has also been preferred by the same
petitioner-association with similar prayer to include the name of Sant Jai Ram Dass College of Education, Village and Post Office Pali, Tehsil and District Mohindergarh, Haryana, which is a member college of the petitioner-association, to grant recognition for the admission intake of B.Ed. course in the list of colleges being considered for such admission in the special session 2007-08.

CWP No. 3682 of 2008 which, vide a separate order, has been preponed for today, has also been preferred by the same petitionerassociation, praying for the similar relief.

Respondent No.1, M.D. University Rohtak had filed a reply to CWP No.3312 of 2008 and in other two connected writ petitions, it made a statement that reply filed in CWP No. 3312 of 2008 be considered as reply in CWP No. 4661 of 2008 and CWP No. 3682 of 2008.

Since the same relief has been sought in all these three writ
petitions, therefore they are being disposed off by this common judgment.

We have heard Mr.Rakesh Nehra and Mr.Vijay Sharma, appearing for the petitioner-association; Dr.Balram Gupta with Sh.Satish Chaudhary for respondent No.1 (M.D. University Rohtak) and Mr.V.S.Bhardwaj for respondent No.2 (National Council for Teachers Association).

It has been stated by the petitioner-association that their member colleges have been granted recognition by National Council for
Teachers Association, respondent No.2 and they also got affiliation with M.D. University Rohtak, respondent No.1. Counsel appearing for the petitioner-association has heavily relied upon Annexure P-12, minutes of 148th Meeting of Academic Council held on 12th February, 2008, wherein it was decided to introduce special session for M.Ed. Regular Course 2007- 08. Relevant extract is reproduced below:

Considered the following:

i) The action taken by the Vice-Chancellor in pursuance of the orders of Honble High Court and thus in anticipation of the approval of the Academic Council, to run (as one time exception) a special academic session for M.Ed. (Regular) Programme.

ii) Make admissions, consequently, to 16 colleges of Education
(Annexure XI at page 60, already circulated) based on counseling of candidates who have already applied for admissions to the programme in 2007-08, and for whom an
Entrance Test has already been conducted.

iii) Hold a separate special examination for such students after they have gone through a full teaching training schedule (Annexure XII Page 61, already circulated) to be drawn in conformity with all the statutory requirements, with examinations, academic schedule and declaration of result independent of those M.Ed. students whose academic session has already started with effect from 26.11.2004.

iv) Charge Rs.5000/- as Special Examination fee for this one time Special Academic Session.

v) Each of these Colleges be required to give an undertaking to the effect that they will made up all the deficiencies as pointed in their respective inspection report by March 20, 2008.

The Vice Chancellor informed the Council about the observations received by fax from the Higher Education Commissioner, Haryana in the matter.

The Council noted the decision of the Honble Punjab and Haryana High Court received in a few cases as to the University having not been able to hold second counseling for admission to its M.Ed. programme.

It was also noted that a large number of students were deprived of admissions made to the regular session, while quite a few Self-financing Colleges of Education were prepared to make admissions and had the infrastructure for running a special session for the M.Ed.Course.

Keeping in the above in view, it was:

RESOLVED THAT THE ACTION TAKEN BY THE VICE-CHANCELLOR AS ABOVE BE APPROVED.

RESOLVED FURTHER THAT THE VICECHANCELLOR MAY CONSTITUTE A COMMITTEE OF 3-4 PERSONS UNDER THE CHAIRMANSHIP OF DEAN, ACADEMIC AFFAIRS TO EXAMINE THE RELEVANT STATUTE/ ORDINANCE GOVERNING GRANT OF AFFILIATION TO NEW COLLEGES/
INSTITUTES OF SUGGEST STEPS NECESSARY FOR COMPLIANCE OF AND ADHERENCE TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SAME, ESPECIALLY IN ORDER TO AVOID ADMISSIONS BEING MADE THEREIN AFTER THE DUE DATES.

The counsel for the petitioner have further held that resolution
No. 22 was separately passed that on the same analogy of special session introduced for M.Ed. Regular Course 2007-08, same be also permitted for starting of special session of B.Ed. regular course 2007-08. Resolution No.22 is reproduced below:

22. Introduction of Special Session for B.Ed. Regular Course 2007-08.

Considered the request of Association of Education Colleges (Self Financing) of Haryana (Annexure XVII pages 69-70, already circulated) for starting a Special Session of B.Ed. Regular Course, 2007-08 (on the analogy of Special Session introduced for M.Ed. Regular Course 2007-08) and to hold centralized
counseling for admissions on the basis of merit drawn for B.Ed. Common Entrance Test, 2007 for the newly NCTE recognized Colleges of Education in the State of Haryana.

RESOLVED THAT THE REQUEST AS ABOVE BE APPROVED EXACTLY ON THE SAME PATTERN AS APPROVED UNDER AGENDA ITEM NO.21 ABOVE.

RESOLVED FURTHER THAT ADMISSIONS TO THE B.ED. COURSE FOR THIS SPECIAL SESSION BE MADE ONLY FOR THE NEW COLLEGES AND THAT NO SUCH ADMISSIONS BE ALLOWED AGAINST VACANT SEATS/ INCREASE INTAKE IN THE EXISTING COLLEGES WHERE ADMISSIONS FOR THE REGULAR SESSION 2007-08 HAVE ALREADY BEEN MADE.

Counsel for the university has stated that even though the resolutions were passed, as certain colleges were affiliated with
Kurukshetra University, to have the uniformity in the State, consent of Kurukshetra University was also sought for making admissions in the special session 2007-08 as the M.D. University was the Nodal University for conducting the counseling for admission. Since the consent of Kurukshetra University had not been received, delay has occurred and it was observed by the Vice Chancellor that it was then too late to run a Special Session in terms of the decision of the Academic Council. The time left was too short to comply with the statutory requirements laid down by the NCTE and accordingly ordered not to proceed further in introducing the Special Session for B.Ed. Regular Course 2007-08 at this belated stage.

It has further been averred in the written statement as under:

Moreover, as per norms and standards for Secondary Teacher Education Programme leading to Bachelor of Education (B.Ed.) Degree issued by the NCTE, there shall be atleast 180 working days, exclusive of period of examination and admission etc., out of which atleast 40 days shall be for teaching practice. Besides this, every College will observe Summer Vacation, Autumn break
and Winter break of 7 days each. A total period of one Academic Session to complete the above requirements is about 10 months.

In case we start B.Ed. Special Session in the month of March, obviously it will run to December, 2008. Needless to say that their result and examination will be declared very late which will create problem for the smooth running of the session, 2008-09.

The delay of holding examinations and declaring results is not in the public interest because it may affect the chances of students to go for further course/ career.

Dr.Balram Gupta appearing for the University has stated that April 2008 is coming to an end and fresh academic session 2008-09 is to commence from July 2008. In case special session as sought by the petitioner-association, is allowed then in July simultaneously two sessions, i.e., special session 2007-08 and 2008-09 will be running together. To run both the sessions, infrastructure is not available. Colleges are ill-equipped to manage both the sessions. Furthermore, faculty will be under strain and the quality of teaching will deteriorate. University will not be able to ensure academic excellence.

We find force in these contentions of Dr.Balram Gupta, counsel for the university. We find no reason to allow these writ petitions,
which are motivated for a profit for running two simultaneous courses.

In the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that while exercising writ jurisdiction, judicial intervention is not called for.

To ensure academic excellence, is the job of authorities of the University, for which they are best qualified and the courts perhaps, are less qualified to judge. The University, while permitting special session 2007-08 has to take various parameters into consideration. As the University, for the valid
reasons, have found that it is not possible to hold special session for 2007- 08, we cannot issue mandamus to them to run such a special session, simply because petitioner-association desires so.

Hence, we find no merit in these three writ petitions and they are liable to be dismissed.

[KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA]
JUDGE

[ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA]
JUDGE


NAV RATTAN GAUTAMVsTHE M D UNIVERSITY ROHTAK AND ANOTHER Civil Writ Petition 2946 of 1989
Friday, 13th November, 2009
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND
HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

Date of Decision:- 13.11.2009

Nav Rattan Gautam …Petitioner
Versus
The M.D.University, Rohtak and another …Respondents

CORAM:
HONBLE MR.JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR

Present:
Mr.Ram Chander, Advocate for the petitioner.
None for the respondents.

Mehinder Singh Sullar, J.
At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that as the controversy involved in this writ petition is
squarely covered by the judgment rendered by this Court in Civil Writ Petition No.10023 of 1988 titled as Sher Chand Chhabra Vs.
Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak and another, therefore, the same may be disposed of in the same terms.

Ordered accordingly.

(Mehinder Singh Sullar)
Judge


Students can view univ convocation live on web
Tuesday, 18th January, 2011
Mumbai: For the first time in its history, it will be possible to view the Mumbai Universitys convocation ceremony live across the world.

The university is organising a live webcast of the ceremony for students and parents who would be unable to attend the ceremony. While only 100 students will be able to make it to the ceremony, lakhs of them can visit the universitys website on February 5 to have a glimpse of the ceremony.

The capacity of the convocation hall is limited, and only students who have won medals would be able to attend it. There are 100 medal recipients and therefore 100 students will be part of the convocation procession. We have decided to go online for the benefit of other students who wish to view the ceremony. Students from colleges in Ratnagiri and the interiors of Thane district will also be able to see the ceremony, said Vilas Shinde, controller of examinations, Mumbai University.

According to Shinde, there are around 650 colleges under the university and more than 50-60 departments. There is also a rapid increase in the number of students enrolling, and so it is difficult to accommodate all of them. There are around 1.6 lakh convocation certificates to be given this year. Our intention is that more students should be able to experience the ceremony, he added.

On February 5, students should log on to the Mumbai University website to access the live webcast. Convocation certificates of students who will not attend the ceremony will be sent to their respective colleges.


SATYAWAN Versus MAHARISHI DAYANAND UNIVERSITY ROHTAK AND ANOTHER Civil Writ Petition No. 11941 of 2010 (O AND M)
Tuesday, 26th October, 2010
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Satyawan …Petitioner
Versus
Maharishi Dayanand University, Rohtak and another …Respondents
Present:

Mr. Naveen S. Bhardwaj, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Balram Gupta, Senior Advocate with Mr. Shirish Gupta, Advocate for respondent No. 1/University.

RANJIT SINGH J.
Respondent No. 2 stands served but no one appears for respondent No. 2. Counsel for the University says that he need not to file reply as the University has taken a decision to regularise the admission of the petitioner. Since the necessary relief has been granted to the petitioner, the writ petition is rendered infructuous. The necessary consequential relief shall also follow. Dismissed as infructuous.

(RANJIT SINGH)
JUDGE


NITISH KUMAR YADAV AND OTHERS Versus MAHARSHI DAYANAND UNIVERSITY ROHTAK AND OTHERS Civil Writ Petition N o. 10917 of 2010
Thursday, 30th September, 2010
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Date of decision: 30.09.2010

Nitish Kumar Yadav and others …Petitioners
Versus
Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak and others …Respondents
Present: Mr. Narender Yadav, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. Balram Gupta, Senior Advocate with
Ms. Anamika Negi, Advocate for respondent No. 1.
Mr. Naveen S. Bhardwaj, Advocate for
Mr. Vinod S. Bhardwaj, Advocate for respondent No. 2.

RANJIT SINGH J.
As per the counsel for the University, recognition has already been granted. The relief claimed in the writ petition, thus, has been granted. The writ petition is rendered infructuous and is disposed of as such.

(RANJIT SINGH)
JUDGE


PARSHOTAM KUMAR Versus MAHARISHI DAYANAND UNIVERSITY ROHTAK Civil Writ Petition No. 12545 of 2010
Monday, 27th September, 2010
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Date of decision: 27.09.2010

Parshotam Kumar …Petitioner
Versus
Maharishi Dayanand University Rohtak …Respondents

Present: Mr. Kuldeep Jangama, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. Balram Gupta, Senior Advocate with
Mr. G.P.S. Bal, Advocate for the respondents.

RANJIT SINGH J.
The petitioner has filed this writ petition for grant of admission to Five years LLB course with the respondent/University in the category of BCA candidates. The petitioner was permitted to appear in the entrance examination but has been denied admission on the ground that he was over 20 years of age. Notice of motion was issued and reply on behalf of the University has been filed. Reference is made to Corrigendum, which was displayed on the University website for information of the candidates. In the Corrigendum, which is an integral part of the prospectus, in Clauses 1 and 2 of Chapter 1 of the prospectus the basic conditions of eligibility for admission to BA LLB courses were stipulated. It is provided that the applicant would be eligible to appear in LLB 5-years course through Entrance Examination, if he has passed 10+2 Examination or equivalent Examination recognised by this University securing at least 50% (40% in case of SC/ST) marks in aggregate and is not more than 20 years of age (22 years in case of SC/ST candidate) on 01.07.2010). It is this condition with which the petitioner is confronted with. The petitioner being over 20 years as on 01.07.2010 has been considered ineligible. There is no challenge before me to this eligibility. Submission that there was no fault on the part of the petitioner may be true but if the petitioner does not fulfill the eligibility condition, which was provided by issuing corrigendum, the same cannot be ignored for grant of consideration of the petitioners right for admission. In view of the position as noticed above, there is no cause for interference in the writ petition and the same is, accordingly, dismissed.

(RANJIT SINGH)


RAM CHANDER Versus MAHARSHI DAYANAND UNIVERSITY ROHTAK AND OTHERS CWP No.7050/2009
Friday, 17th September, 2010
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

Ram Chander …Petitioner
VERSUS
Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak and others …Respondents

CORAM HONBLE MR.JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI PRESENT:
Mr.J.V.Yadav, Advocate for petitioner
Mr.Anurag Goyal, Advocate for respondents

Permod Kohli, J. (Oral)
Keeping in view the controversy involved and with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, this petition is disposed of at motion stage itself. Respondent no.1-University advertised five posts of Lecturers in Institute of Management Studies and Research vide Advertisement No.1 of 2008. Three out of five posts were reserved for Scheduled Caste candidates. Without completing the process of selection, the posts were re-advertised vide advertisement No.3 of 2008. It was stipulated in the subsequent advertisement that the candidates who had applied in response to the earlier advertisement need not apply again. The petitioner had applied in response to the first advertisement. It is stated that the petitioner is fully eligible. Besides academic qualifications, the petitioner is LL.B Professional, B.Ed and has also passed tests like UGC Test for Junior Research Fellowship and Eligibility for Lectureships in the year 1996, State Level Eligibility Test for Lectureship from Kurukshetra University, Kurukshetra in the year 1995 and UGC-NET examination for eligibility for Lectureship in the year 2004. The petitioner has also worked as Marketing Manager in BM Tours and Travels Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi. The petitioner was called for interview vide letter dated 19.9.2008.

Interview was held on 6.10.2008. On completion of the process of selection, private respondents were selected for the post under the Schedule Caste category. It appears that being not satisfied with the outcome of the selection, the petitioner sought information under the Right to Information Act in respect of the marks obtained by the candidates in the interview and merit position etc. vide application dated 2.1.2009. Official respondents furnished the information vide its reply dated 19.1.2009 (Annexure P-10). From the information furnished by the respondents, it has been revealed that no merit list was prepared on the basis of the performance in the interview and selection has been made without determining the inter se merit and without applying any rational and valid criteria. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at length. It is true that selection body is entitled to formulate its own criteria for making selection, if not otherwise provided for under any rules or laid down guidelines. However, the criteria has to be fair, rational and non-arbitrary. From the written statements filed, it is evident rather an admission on the part of the respondents that no statutory criteria exists nor there is any laid down criteria for making selection. It has been stated in the reply that the selection has been made on the basis of the recommendation of the Selection Committee. On receipt of the recommendation from the Selection Committee, the Executive Council of the University adopted a resolution approving the recommendation of the Selection Committee. It has also been disclosed that as many as 58 applications were received for the five posts, 21 candidates were found eligible. According to the information furnished to the petitioner, all the eligible candidates were called for interview for 6.10.2008 excluding the ESM Category. 17 candidates appeared in interview. The Selection Committee did not prepare any merit list of the candidates on the basis of their performance in the interview and just recommended two names i.e. respondents no. 3 and 4 for appointment. Record of selection was called for. From the record of selection, it is evident that neither any marks were awarded for interview and/or academic merit nor the candidates were graded in any other manner. How and what mode was adopted for selection seems to be a close secret. No valid, rational and fair criteria was laid down or adopted for making selection nor any record of inter-se merit of the appearing candidates has been maintained. In the reply, it is admitted that no merit list was prepared. Without preparing the inter se merit of the candidates, how private respondents were assessed better than the petitioner since no marks are disclosed anywhere nor the same are revealed from the record of selection. Reply to question no.2 given under the Right to Information Act establishes the total
arbitrariness on the part of the respondents/selection body. Question No.2 of the petitioner and response thereto are reproduced here under:-
Question Answer
2. Those supply the merit list with details of marks awarded on accounts of merits and in interview to the selection and nonselected candidates for the post of Lecturer of Psychology and Management under advertisement No.1/2008 and 3/2008.

2.Proceedings of the Committee is/are attached herewith wherein the Selection Committee has not prepared any merit list. Above answer leaves no room to speculate about the manner and method of selection rather it is abundantly clear that selection has been made against all settled cannons of service jurisprudence. How the selection can be made without assessing the inter se merit of the candidates is sole question which has come up for consideration in the present case. Admittedly, the Selection Committee has not prepared any merit as per reply to paragraph 2 of the application for seeking information under Right to Information Act. This clearly establishes that the selection has been made without any fair, valid and rational criteria being adopted or even assessing the merits of the appearing candidates. It would not be wrong to infer that the entire selection is a farce and has been made by adopting Pick and Choose Method. Selection made in this manner cannot be sustained even if the selectees are the best suited candidates for the job.

Petition is accordingly allowed with the following directions:-
(i)Selection/appointment of respondents no.3 and 4 is hereby quashed;
(ii)The University will formulate a rational, fair, non-arbitrary and valid criteria for the purpose of making selection to the post in question and notify the same not only within the University Campus, but even in public by issuing the advertisement in one English newspaper and one vernacular having circulation in the concerned area; (iii)Fresh selection shall be made in accordance with the notified criteria within a period of four months. Petitioner and all other candidates who were eligible at the time of advertisement shall have the right to participate in the selection process notwithstanding that thereafter anyone of them has been rendered ineligible on account of over-age etc.

(PERMOD KOHLI)
JUDGE


Law student commits suicide
Tuesday, 7th February, 2012
Rohtak (Haryana): A law student allegedly committed suicide by jumping before a moving train here, the police said.
Babli (22), who was pursuing LLB from Maharshi Dayanand University, ended her life by jumping before Delhi-Jind Passenger train yesterday, they said.

The reason behind the girl taking the extreme step is yet to be ascertained, police said.


Students burn effigy of Haryana chief minister in university campus
Wednesday, 25th April, 2012
Rohtak: An effigy of Haryana Chief Minister Bhupinder Singh Hooda was burnt in the Maharshi Dayanand University campus in Rohtak today by students who were enraged over the governments alleged inaction into the scams that surfaced in the university.

The protesters threatened the government to go to court if stern action was not taken against the university officers for gross financial irregularities in various projects.

Gathering near the Central Library in the new campus of the university, the protesters also shouted slogans against Vice Chancellor (VC) Ramphal Hooda, taking out a procession and then burning the effigy.
Addressing the protesters, INSO leader Pradeep Deswal alleged that inferior material was used in the construction of various buildings in the university campus.

Though several complaints with proofs had been made in this regard to the university authorities and state government, Mr Deswal asserted that no action had so far been taken indicating foul play in the matter.

Similarly, probe was also not made into the Rs. 100-crore scam in distance education and valuable land of the university was disposed of to a real estate company by the university authority for fulfilling its vested interest, the leader claimed.

Being students of the university, it is our moral responsibility to raise our voice against those illegal and corrupt practices being adopted by top officers of the university to destroy its academic atmosphere, said Mr Deswal, adding, such anti-student policies of the authorities would not be tolerated.


Profile of Maharshi Dayanand University
Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak,


Introduction
Maharshi Dayanand University (MDU) is a public university located at Rohtak, Haryana, India. Established in 1976 and named after the great saint Maharshi Dayanand Saraswati, the varsity is a premier institution of higher education in the region. The university offers courses in different fields of study at undergraduate, post graduate and doctoral levels. Besides offering courses at campus, it also acts as an affiliating university and provides several programs through various colleges, institutes and centers throughout the region. The colleges of districts Bhiwani, Faridabad, Gurgaon, Jhajjar, Mahendergarh, Rewari, Rohtak, and Sonepat are affiliated to the university.

Maharshi Dayanand University was established through an Act of the Legislative Assembly of Haryana in the year 1976 with a specific objective- “To establish and incorporate a teaching-cum-affiliating university at Rohtak for the encouragement of interdisciplinary higher education and research with special emphasis on studies of life sciences and environmental and ecological sciences”. During the 31 years of its existence the University has achieved a remarkable degree of success in its academic pursuits, expansion programs, and infrastructural development.

Moving from the limited original objective of studies in life sciences, the University today functions with 13 faculties, 27 post graduate departments, and runs 77 academic programs on campus.

There are 66 Boards of Studies for developing and designing courses in various disciplines.

Besides the main campus, there are 2 satellite campuses – Regional Center offering post graduate programs at Rewari, and the National Law College at Gurgaon.

As an affiliating University, it has 126 institutions and colleges under its wings with a cumulative enrollment of about 1.70 lac students in various disciplines.

Among the premier professional institutions, it has the prestigious Post Graduate Institute of Medical Sciences at Rohtak with a 1000 bed hospital, a post graduate College of Medicine offering specializations in 21 disciplines. Besides, the University also boasts of a Medical College at Agroha, and a Dental College at Rohtak.

Among other affiliated institutes, the University has a number of engineering colleges, management institutes, pharmacy colleges etc.

On Campus, it has a Directorate of Distance Education with an enrollment of over 50,000 students for 24 professional and regular courses.

The University has established six Chairs to conduct research on the lives and contributions of some eminent Indians.Maharshi Dayanand Saraswati, before he became a sanyasin, bore the name of Mulshankar. He was borne in 1824 in state of Morvi in Kathiyawar, Gujrat. His father Karshan ji Lal ji Tiwari, was an orthodox Brahmin and a devout worshiper of Lord Shiva. Mulshankar’s Sanskrit education began at the age of five and he was invested with the sacred thread in his eighth year. By the time he was fourteen he had committed to memory the whole of the of Yajurveda and several portion of other Vedas. In his fourteenth year, on the Shivaratri day, he was commanded by his father to participate in the night long vigil in the temple of Shiva. His father and the other devotees soon fall asleep. Young Mulshankar now and then bathed his eyes with cold water and heroically withstood the temptation to go to sleep. Then came a hideous doubt in his mind whether the stone image of Shiva before him bestriding a bull and holding a trident in his hand and beating a drum, and allowing live rats to crawl over its body- whether this idol, could indeed be the Lord of Kailash, the Supreme being. He roused his father from his sleep and asked him to clear his doubts. His father in the usual way explained that Shiva could not be perceived directly in this Kali Age, and hence people had to the idol representing God and consecrated by Vedic mantras for the purposes of worship. The boy was not satisfied with such an explanation and went home. He broke his fast and put an end to his vigil, as he had made up his mind to break away once and for all from idol worship.

There are other incidents in his life that left indelible marks on his mind-the death of his sister and of his uncle whom he had loved so passionately. These painful experiences only helped him to intensify the inner enquiry about the higher question of life. He began to have serious misgivings about capacity of prevailing religious systems to provide satisfying answers to these serious queries regarding life, death and sufferings. He however went on with his studies with redoubled energy, resolving to attain liberation through the practice of yoga and thus triumph over death. His parents came to know of his resolve and were determined to get him married so that he might not renounce the world in preference for a life of renunciation. When his protests were of no avail and day was fixed for his wedding, he fled from his home and became a Sadhu and changed his name to Brahmachari Shuddha Chaitanya. Shuddha Chaitanya wondered here and there in search of truth and knowledge and met a Sanyasi Swami Purnanand Saraswati. This Sanyasi initiated him in to the Saraswati order and gave a new name Dayanand Saraswati.

Dyanand Saraswati took an exhaustive tour of India. It was during this time that he practiced yoga and learnt Vedanta Philosophy. In search of a teacher who could give him the right clues to knowledge he wondered from place to palace. All this time, he met only with those who could make good show with the outer paraphernalia of so-called religious life. After fifteen years restless wondering from place to place and from teacher to teacher, in 1860 Dayanand reached Mathuara and found a Guru after his own heart. This was a blind Sanyasi called Virajanand Dandi, a great authority on Sanskrit grammar and man of heroic mould. His hatred of image worship, and of the traditional system of teaching was consuming fire. His soul was the full of purity and greatness of India’s glorious past.

This man’s influence on Dayanand was permanent. It was who he made clear to the young man his mission of life. Dayanand stayed with his Guru for two and of half years at Mathura. He was taught to have implicit faith in the ancient books written by Rishis.On the completion of his study, the Dakshina, the fee demanded by his guru was solemn pledge on the part of his pupil to devote his life to the dissemination of truth and to wage incessant war on the falsehood of Puranic Hinduism and restore the true teaching of the Vedas. His words were-’ Promise me that you will, as long as you live, devote everything , even give up your life, to the propagation in India of the books of the Rishis and Vedic Religion’.

The next twelve years of Dayanand’s life were years of preparation for the tremendous task set before him. He left his master in 1863 and visited Agra, Gwalior, Jaipur, Pushkar, Ajmer, Hridwar,Benaras and several other places-holding discussions with pandits and fearlessly criticizing orthodox opinions and denouncing idolatry. It was Bombay (Mumbai) that his mission took a definite shape by the publication in early 1875 of his major book, the Satyarth Prakash, and by the establishment of the Aryasamaj on 10,April 1875.

The next twelve years of Dayanand’s life were years of preparation for the tremendous task set before him. He left his master in 1863 and visited Agra, Gwalior, Jaipur, Pushkar, Ajmer, Hridwar,Benaras and several other places-holding discussions with pandits and fearlessly criticizing orthodox opinions and denouncing idolatry. It was Bombay (Mumbai) that his mission took a definite shape by the publication in early 1875 of his major book, the Satyarth Prakash, and by the establishment of the Aryasamaj on 10,April 1875. The rest of Dayanand’s life was spent in organizing the branches of the Samaj and in translating the Vedas in to Hindi, in addition to writing other texts explaining his ideas. His principal works are- The Satyarth Prakash, the Rigvedadi Bhashyabhoomika and the Sanskarvidhi. During this time he met the members of the Prathana samaj and the Theosophical Socity, but the latter could not come to terms with his revolutionary ideas and Dayanand had to part company with them. Throughout his life Dayanand had to bear abuse, calumny, violence and even attempts on his life. But his courage purity of his character and his single minded devotion to his purpose bore down all apposition. He always advocated for truth and knowledge, as he writes in the fourth and eighth principals of Aryasamaj.

‘One should always be prepared to accept truth and reject falsehood’. ‘One should always promote knowledge and dispel ignorance’.

At Jodhapur, he was fatally poisoned and passed away on October30, 1883 at the age of fifty-nine.

Scholars compare Maharshi Dayanand with Martin Luther. At close look of Luther and Dayanand would reveal many points of contact between the two. As Luther a German monk, was child of the European renaissance, so Dayanand, the Gujrat born monk, was a child of Indian renaissance. Both alike felt the tug of ‘Zeitgeist’. Both in there different ways become exponents of the new spirit. Luther attacked indulgences, while Dayanand attacked idolatry among other things. Luther appealed from the Roman Church and the authority of the tradition to the scriptures of the old and new testaments. Dayanand appealed from the Brahmanical Church and the authority of the Shruti and Smriti texts to the earliest and most sacred of Indian scriptures. The watchword Luther was ‘ Back to the Bible’, while that of Dayanand was ‘Back to the Vedas’.


Profile of University
Maharshi Dayanand University is Situated at a distance of 70-km Northwest of Delhi on the National Highway No. 10, It is spread over a sprawling 740 acres of land on the outskirts of the historic city of Rohtak.

Named after the great social reformer and founder of Arya Samaj, Maharshi Dayanand University was established in 1976 as a residential University with the objective of promoting higher studies in the fields of environmental, ecological and life sciences and inter-disciplinary education and research. But in 1978, the unitary and residential character of the University was changed when all colleges in five districts of Haryana were affiliated with this University, and, thus, turning it into a teaching-cum-affiliating University.

The University during this span, has grown to 27 Post-Graduate departments under 12 Faculties with more than 350 faculty members; one Post-Graduate Regional Centre at Rewari; one maintained University College; one Directorate of Distance Education and one Computer Centre. Besides, 110 affiliated colleges offering courses in humanities, science, commerce and management; Post-Graduate Medical Research Institute and Dental College, Rohtak; Medical College, Agroha; State College of Engineering, Murthal; Technological Institute of Textiles, Bhiwani are among the premier affiliated nstitution which form the nucleus of University’s diverse academic programmes.

The University over the years has been constantly improving the quality of education in the traditional areas of Arts, Commerce and pure Sciences. At the same time, we have not been obvious to the rapid changes that are taking place in the sphere of technical and professional education. We have introduced a number of job oriented courses in our University Teaching Departments and University College from the current academic session. Some of these are: -

* Bachelor of Information Technology (BIT)

* Bachelor of Information Sciences (BIS)

* 2 Years Master’s Programme in Global Business

* One year P.G. Diploma in Advt. And Media Management

* One year P.G. Diploma in Pharmaceutical Marketing

* LL.M. through Distance Education

* P.G. Diploma in Labour law and Labour Welfare through Distance Education

* P.G. Diploma in Inland Aqua Culture

* P.G. Diploma in Physical Education

* Certificate Course in Physical Education

* Complete List of Courses Offered

The above changes, however, increase the cost of education considerably, which conflicts with our social obligation. As all of you are aware, the bulk of our students are from rural background. The University has, however, been aware of its social obligation towards them Besides, adhering to the stipulated reservation policy of the Govt. in respect of weaker section of our society both for admission and recruitment, we have also been giving special consideration for admission to students from rural areas. It is because of this reason that the fees of our University remain amongst the lowest. At the same time, we have well aware of the fact that MDU Universities need to generate more points to meet the increasing cost of education and their growth to counter the receding Government support. We are in the process of evolving certain plans to meet this challenge keeping in mind the background of our students. At the same time, we are firm in our resolve not to neglect our social obligations.

The Department of Computer Science & Applications which was established some years back is fast emerging as a nucleus for diverse academic activities on the Campus. From 1994-95, after developing adequate infrastructural facilities, the department started offering 3-year Master’s Programme in Computer Applications. Besides, conducting formal courses, the Department of Computer Science has been providing free consultancy services to many educational Institutions in developing computer labs and has also been identified as one of the Centres for conducting training programmers for affiliating colleges by the University Grants Commission.

In a continued attempt to update educational and infrastructural facilities on the campus, the University has developed a Computer Centre and University Instrumentation Centre. The Computer Centre is extending central computing and data processing facilities and has ambitious plans to computerize major University functioning. The Instrumentation Centre is fast coming up to facilitate the centralization of major sophisticated equipment for maximum utilization by teachers, researchers and students in diverse disciplines.

Equipped with Hi-tech Instrumental Aids, Computer Labs, Conference Rooms, EDP Rooms, Xerox, Fax and E-mail facilities, its own In-House Management Library with over 10,000 titles, subscribing to 10 dailies and 35 national and international journals, Institute of Management Studies and Research (IMSAR) is housed in a beautifully designed building. Besides running 2-Year Full-time and 3-Year Part- time MBA Courses, it is the only Institute in Haryana that offers 5-Year Integrated MBA Programme to the young students who w ish to opt Management as their career after 10+2. To mould itself into a true 21st Century business school, the institute offers specialisation in Information Technology, International Business, Marketing, Finance, Human Resource Management and Production.

IMSAR is further augmenting its contribution to the corporate world by introducing 2-Year Masters Programme in Global Business Management, One-Year P.G. Diploma in Advertising and Media Management and one-Year P.G. Diploma in Pharmaceutical Marketing through Distance Education. Development of students personality and their exposure to real corporate world has been identified as the area of strategic focus at IMSAR and as result the Institute is legitimately proud of the fact that its products over the years are holding fairly senior executive positions in various organisations of repute.

To satisfy the long standing demand of the people of Haryana, the University has also established the Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences which is meeting the requirements of the fast emerging Pharmaceutical Sector in the Country. Continuing with the process, the University has constituted a committee of Senior Faculty members from various faculties to explore the possibilities and suggest the introduction of market oriented new courses in various disciplines. On the recommendations of the committee, from the current academic session, the University has started two new courses in the area of Information Technology in the University College, three courses in the area of management science through distance education and Certificate Course in the area of Physical Education. Our endeavor in this direction is to make our product competent enough to handle the challenges of today’s highly competitive, complex and dynamic corporate world.

Apart from running LL.M., LL.B. 3 Year course and Post Graduate Diploma in Labour Law, the faculty of law has been the pioneer in introducing 5-Year Integrated Course of LL.B. in 1983, which has been the subsequently followed by various Universities of the country. Since its inception the faculty has earned many distinction in the teaching, extra curricular activities and rendering extension services. Under the legal aid programme, hundreds of legal aid camps and workshops have been organised in remote areas of the State. Excellence in cultural and youth activities has brought laurels in national level competitions. Our team has the distinction of winning first prize in first National Model Youth Parliament competition organized by Govt. of India in 1998. In the second National Level competition of Model Youth Parliament, the team won the merit trophy. Our students have proved their worth in Indian Civil Services as well as Judicial Services. Faculty of Law has a rich collection of 26,000 books in its library and it is regularly publishing its own MDU Law Journal on annual basis. In addition to traditional Post-Graduate Courses, the University is already running such courses as that of Journalism and Mass Communication, Rural Development, and Defence & Strategic Studies.

Keeping in view the spirit of Open University System and in accordance with the National Policy of Education, which lays emphasis on continuing and distance education, Maharshi Dayanand University is running various Under-Graduate and Post-Graduate Courses through correspondence since 1988. For the purpose of providing quality education and also to make the courses comparable at national and international level, the status of Directorate of Correspondence was upgraded to Directorate of Distance Education.

Encouraged by the successful implementation and completion of B.Ed., M.Ed and other programmes for the last many years, the University has also decided to start various professional courses w.e.f. the current academic session. Besides running these courses, the Directorate is also planning to organise seminars, workshops and conferences for improving the quality of distance education.

With the University maturing into greater all round activity in all spheres, the academic and research activities on the campus have acquired a new thrust. Under the teachers exchange programme, eminent scholars have visited various departments for extension lectures. Some of our faculty members have visited other Universities and abroad on various fellowships/exchange programmes. There has been a constant exposure of our faculty through participation in national/international seminars/conferences in India and abroad.

During previous academic session, seminars/conferences of the national and international level were organised by various departments on the campus. One day National Seminar on ‘Various Aspects of the Pauranik Literature’ was organised by the Department of Sanskrit, Pali & Prakrit. The Department of Commerce organised one-day Seminar on ‘Stock Market Operations – Emerging Issues and Aspects’. The Department of Economics organised two-day National Conference on ‘Green Revolution, Technology and Sustainable Development in India’. The Department of Public Administration organised a two-day National Seminar on ‘New Challenges before Public Administration in India’. Department of Sociology organised a two-day conference on ‘Patterns and Problems of Social Transformation in North-West India’. A two-day National Conference on ‘Managerial Responses to Corporate Sector in the New Millenium’ was organised in February 2000 by the Institute of Management Studies and Research in which more than 100 distinguished scholars and executives from various Universities and the corporate sector participated. The Department of Chemistry conducted a two-day National Seminar on ‘Analytical Methods in Industry & Labs’. A two-day National Conference was organised by the Department of Bio-Sciences on ‘Utilisation of Saline Soil for Aquaculture’ in collaboration with Central Institute for Fisheries Education, Versova, and Mumbai. About 70 scientists and 60 fish farmers participated. 40 Research Papers were presented and 15 Lectures were delivered, Prizes were awarded for highest production of fish per hectare to farmers. Likewise, almost every department organised various activities like lecture series, workshops, exhibition, quiz contests, debates, extension lectures etc. during the previous academic session.

In terms of achievements, the University can be justly proud of its track record in all fields. Its alumni re well placed in various walks of life-an asset we intend exploring for betterment of the institution. Some reputed companies like Tata Consultancy Services are regularly conducting campus interviews. In the field of extra curricular activities we offer our students substantial variety. The student in turn has done us proud.

The University teachers have been regularly publishing research articles in prestigious national and/or international journals and magazines. They have been granted a large number of major/minor research projects by various agencies apart from U.G.C. Teachers in various departments have also published a number of books in various disciplines. The fact that more than 300 research scholars have been awarded Ph.D. degrees in various disciplines since last convocation in 1998 speaks of the volume of research work being done in the University. Owing to space and time limitations the details of these research works publications, unfortunately cannot be provided.

The Library in a University campus forms the nucleus of all academic activities. Maharshi Dayanand University Library offers excellent facilities with a seating capacity for 650 readers at a time and 24 cubicles for University teachers and researchers. Equipped with nearly 2 Lac documents, 600 Indian and foreign Journals, 3 reading halls, 2 seminar halls, a spacious Committee Room, it is rightfully the hub of all academic activities. In the process of modernising, the functioning of the library is being computerized. Various services like biographic services, reprographic services, inter-library loan facilities, Xerox facility, E-mail and Internet facilities are made available to the users of the library.

In addition to beautiful playgrounds and massive sports infrastructure, a major attraction on the campus is the Swimming Pool of national standard. In sports our students have achieved commendable positions in various games at the national level. During previous academic session our University won All India Inter-University Championship in Wrestling, Yoga (women),Softball and Boxing. Our Yoga (men) and Kabaddi (men) teams did well to win 2nd position in the All India Inter-University Championship. Our Cross Country (Men) team have also obtained 3 rd place in the All India Inter-University Championship. Besides excellent team performances, our players brought laurel to the University by winning individual positions. Sandeep and Sajjan Pal of Govt. College, Dujana won Gold Medals and Shri Pal and Naveen Dahiya of C.R.A. College, Sonepat secured Silver Medals in All India Inter-University competition in wrestling. Our students Sunita Dahiya and Babita of Hindu Girls College,Sonepat and Sandeep and Manbir of Vaish College,Bhiwani have been decorated with Gold Medals in All India Inter-University Championship. In total 30 students of our University have received Gold, Silver and Bronze medals at various Inter-University and National Championships. We have been regularly winning a number of medals in the Inter University Championships.Two of our athletes have represented India in Boxing and Hockey.

The University has set up a special SC/ST Cell for the upliftment of SC/ST/other reserved category candidates. The Cell is making earnest efforts for effective implementation of the policies and programmes relating to appointments, promotions, admissions etc of SC/ST candidates. All the policies and programmes of the UGC/Govt. of India/State Govt. received from time to time are fully implemented and all related information is displayed at prominent places to help the reserved category candidates.

To sum up, the campus presents a magnificent architectural and aesthetic delight with a modern three storeyed library building flanked by science blocks to its right and the prestigious Institute of Management Studies and Research and Faculty of Law to its left. A new Arts Faculty adorns the space in between. Indira Gandhi Vidya Bhawan houses various languages and social sciences departments. Together with the imposing structures of Administrative Office and Vice-Chancellor’s office, the whole complex lends additional grace to the physical landscape. The campus provides many other infrastructural facilities and essential amenities for community living like Faculty House, Health Centre, Shopping Complex, Bank, huge playing fields and Sports Complex, Yagyashala, 6 Hostels for boys and girls, a Botanical Garden, a Rose Garden and a Campus School. A large number of residential houses for all categories of teaching and non-teaching employees ensure pulsating corporate life on the campus.

Due to the limitation of time, it is not possible to recount all the details of our achievements in the area of development, research, conferences, cultural activities and sports etc. We have had our share of trials and tribulations but with the commendable cooperation of the members of the faculty, the students and all the employees of the University as well as the people of this area, we have been able to make significant headway in our plans of bringing this University at par with the best in the country.


Objectives
Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak was established through an Act of Legislative Assembly of Haryana in the year 1976 with a specific objective-

“To establish and incorporate a teaching-cum-affiliating University at Rohtak for the encouragement of interdisciplinary higher education and research with special emphasis on studies of Life Sciences and Environmental and Ecological Sciences”. During the last over 26 years of its existence the University has achieved a remarkable degree of success in its expansion programmes, infrastructural developments and in academic excellence.

Moving from the limited original objective of studies in Life Sciences, the University today functions under 13 faculties with 27 post-graduate departments on the campus running 77 academic programmes.

There are 66 Boards of Studies for developing and designing courses in different disciplines.

Besides the main Campus, there are 2 satellite campuses – Regional Centre running post-graduate teaching at Rewari and National Law College at Gurgaon.

As an affiliating University, it has 126 institutions and colleges under its control with an enrolment of about 1.70 lacs students.

Among the premier professional institutions, we have the prestigious Post-Graduate Institute of Medical Sciences at Rohtak with 986 bedded hospital, Medical College and Post Graduate MD/MS Medical studies in 21 disciplines, 9 P.G. Diplomas & a Medical College at Agroha apart from a Dental College at Rohtak.

Among affiliated institutes, the University has a number of Engineering Colleges, Computer and Management Studies institutes, Pharmaceutical Colleges etc.

On Campus, we have a Directorate of Distance Education with an enrolment of 45000 students for 24 professional and non-professional courses.

The University has established six Chairs to conduct research on the lives and contributions of some eminent Indians.


Historical Background
The region surrounding Rohtak occupies the central place in the Bangru speaking zone of the state of Haryana. The town (28 .54 W & 35 E) lies 75 kms West of Delhi on the Ferozepur railway line. The tract is a part of the Ghaggar-Yamuna Divide and has no stream to water it. It has a brackish subsoil water, poor rainfall and an extreme temperature in summer and winter. The region would have remained almost dry and arid but for the canal irrigation by Firozshah Tughluq, Mughals, the British and more recently in the post-independence period.

The antiquity of the region goes back to the pre-Vedic Chalcolithic/Bronze age. The ancient remains of the villages and towns related to the last phase of Indus Civilisation, going back to atleast 4000 years, can still be seen around the region, particularly at Farmana near Mahem and Lahot (near Dhansa border). After the fall of the Indus towns, the village settlements of the Late Harappa Tradition survived until the middle of the second millennium B.C. in its decadent phase.

The advent of a new cultural tradition around 1500 B.C. most probably from the North-West of the subcontinent and beyond displaced the preceding Chalcolihthic/lndus survivors from the Gandhara region of Pakistan to Bihar. It manifested into atleast three related regional cultures, the Gandhara Grave culture (C. 1500-500 B.C.), the Painted Grey Ware (PGW) culture (C.1100- 500 B.C.) and the Black Slipped Ware (BSW) culture (C.800-600 B.C.). The peasant-pastoral PGW culture was distinguished by the use of iron, horse and cattle and a thin grey coloured and painted pottery. It spread from Sutlej to the Ganga and particularly along the Saraswati valley in northern plains. Its discovery from Hastinapur, Panipat, Pehova, Kurukshetra, Mathura. Indraprastha or Delhi excited the imagination of the traditional archaeologists to associate the culture with the Mahabharat heroes. However, the geographical distribution, chronology and the cultural millieu of the PGW culture can be well compared with the culture of the Vedic (later phase) literature or Aryans. The discovery of the PGW culture from the lowest levels of Khokhrakot at Rohtak attests the intrusion of the Vedic people at Rohtak in the later Vedic period. The semi-agricultural and pastoral Aryans uf the Rig Veda had by now taken to settled Janapadas and developed agrarian economy assited by relevant iron technology and social organisation comprising the Varna System. It is about this period that the Gana Rajyas (tribal republics) or chiefdoms came into existence. The political struggle for domination ensued and the more successful established city states or the Mahajanapadas in the 7th century B.C. It is from now onwards that the history of India growingly becomes the history of the struggle of centripetal and centrifugal forces. Magadhan empire emerged successful in establishing almost a pan-Indian hegemony under the Nandas and the Mauryas and gave impetus to the rise of regional cities.

The Rohtak tract saw the growth of Second Urbanisation in the early historic times in the 4th century B.C. as evidenced by the excavations at Khokhra Kot mound near the town. The discovery of Ashokan pillars at Topra in North Haryana and at Hissar and Fatehabad attests the expansion of the Mauryan Empire in our region. The period was marked by the popularity of Prakrit language, the spread of Buddhism, the beginning of brick architecture, coinage and the Brahmi alphabets (a new script). After the collapse of the Mauryan empire the region saw the resurgence of the Tribal republic of the Yaudheyas to be subdued again by the invading Indo- Greeks, Sakas and Kushanas before the beginning of the Christian era. The Kushana rule integrated Northern India with Central Asia. The period saw the growth of urbanisation to higher peaks by boosting trade with Central and Western Asia and Europe. The assimilation of a variety of foreign elements enriched the Indian culture. The early historical period was also distinguished by the prevalence of slavery, caste system, decline in the status of women and untouchables under the sanction of the state and the Dharma Shastras.

The disintegration of the Kushana empire in the 3rd century A.D. again led to the rise of the Yaudheyas (tribal republic) at Rohtak as attested by the discovery of their seals and coin mounds. They were, however, subjugated by another Magadhan empire of the Guptas in the 4th century A.D. Soon after the urban centres decayed gradually giving way to the rise of feudal society and culture, agrarian economy, decentralisation of power and a new hierarchical social order. The town of Rohtak also decayed. The invasion by the Hunas, indicated anarchic conditions of the times.

The early centuries of the Christian era saw.the rise of the cults of Kartikeya. Shiva and Vishnu. This was a great era of cultural fusion when the foreign invaders like the Indo-Greeks, Sakas, Kushanas and the Hunas were assimilated. Stupas, pillars and sculptures, decorated bricks of temples and seals bear testimony to the beautiful art tradition of the region- Wrestling and lute playing with drums were the popular past-time of the people.

The later half of the 6th century A.D. saw the rise of the Puspabhutis or Vardhanas as the rulers of Shrikanth kingdom of Thanesar. Prabhakar Vardhan was a powerful king and ousted the Huna power from the region. Rohtak formed part of the Thanesar kingdom and later of the Kanauj empire of Harsha Vardhana, the Pushpabhuti prince of Thanesar. Anarchic conditions again set in the region with the death of Harsha. Peace was established by Gurjar Pratiharas of Ujjain (who are believed to be foreigners). They conquered North India in the 9th century and ruled from Kanauj. The Tomaras of Delhi, the Samantas of the Pratiharas, asserted their independence in the 10th century and ruled over Haryana including Rohtak.


Historical Overview
Haryana is situated between Lat. 27�39 to 30�55 N. and Long 74�27.8 to 77�36.5 E. It is bounded on the West by Punjab; on the North by Himachal Pradesh; on the East by Uttar Pradesh; and on the South by Rajasthan. Delhi, the National capital, stands conspicuously on its South-Eastern extremity on the right bank of the river Yamuna. Haryana s area is 44,222 sq. kms. and population 2,10,82, 989 (2001). It comprises four divisions of Ambala, Gurgaon, Rohtakand Hisar, and eighteen districts, Hisar, Rohtak, Gurgaon, Karnal, Ambala, Jind, Sirsa, Bhiwani, Faridabad, Sonepat, Kurukshetra, Mahendragarh, Rewari, Jhajjar, Patehabad, Kaithal, Yamuna Nagar and Punchkula. It is a predominantly rural state where 78% live in 7073 villages. The rest of the population 22% – lives in cities (11) and in towns (70).

Physically, the state falls into two broad natural divisions : (i) the Sub-Himalayan Tract; and (ii) the Indo-Gangetic plain, which run almost parallel to each other. But for the Yamuna which forms the state s Eastern boundary with Uttar Pradesh there is no perennial river here. The soil is for the most part medium-textured. Barring a part of Mahendragarh, there is no known mineral wealth. The climate is tropical and the rain fall is inadequate. Agriculture is still the chief means of people s economy, although of late industries have also started coming up in a big way.

Haryana is the matrix of creation , says the tradition. Evidence in the form of fossil remains from the Shivalik foothills gives some credence to this: Ramapithicus, the first harbinger of man is reported to have lived here some 14 million years ago. A few tools of stone found in some parts of Gurgaon (Aravalli hills) and Ambala (Shivaiiks) attest the presence of the “Stone age Man* here around 20 to 30 thousand years ago. This early man of Haryana, it is surmised, belonged to the Begritos.race. He led an exceedingly simple life; knew no cultivation and survived on fruits, nuts and roots, and hunted down small animals. His population was quite sparse but the possibility of his having formed some sort of social institutions can not be ruled out.

This stage of the early settlers of Haryana continued for several thousand years. About third millennium B.C., the society was, however, transformed by a new discovery – farming, which was brought here by the Chalcolithic people from Rajasthan who moved in here through the valley of the Drishadvati around 2500 B.C. The indigenous population, as noted above, being quite sparse seems to have befriended and mixed with the “newcomers giving birth to a new people styled as Siswals by the archaeologists. Agriculture brought sedentary life and villages sprang up. The cultivation of crops and the domestication of animals provided a total production which exceeded the individual s subsistence requirement for a year . This is proved by archaeological finds from the area.

Around 2300 B.C. another new people, the so-catled Harappans came. They were city- dwellers; and no sooner they landed here than there ushered in a sort of urban revolution leading to the emergence of a complex society of specialized tradesmen, and skilled and unskilled workers. The newcomers, after a short while, involved into a process of social assimiltation – the city-dwelling Harappans belonging to the Dravida group of the anthropological type of the Southern Europoid Minor Race mixed-up with the old indigenous inhabitants and gave birth to a new ethnic community whom we can call the forbears of the Haryanavis. These people continued to live in the region peacefully with ample social security owing to their superior economy But sometime around the later half of the second millennium B.C. a new people using the Painted Gray Ware (PGW), the Aryans, arrived on the scene from the North- West and caused some stir. The population of the original settlers was sparse. Nor was the PGW immigration on a very large scale. And since quite extensive cultivable land was available, there was no clash between the two peoples. The archaeological explorations conducted here so far indicate that there are only very few sites where the settlements of both the Siswal- Harappans and PGW men are found; and there too. the evidence of clash or killing of one by the other is conspicuous by its absence. Conversely at one site – Bhagwanpura, even evidence of their living together in peace and harmony is met with. This negates the current theory that Aryans annihilated the original inhabitants or drove them out and occupied their places. At least in our region this did not happen. After sometime, however, a strange, phenomenon is witnessed. The Aryans, a simple folk, overshadowed the materially well-off, urbanized old settlers. How did they do this? In the present state of our knowledge, it is difficult to give an exact answer to this query However, the explanation provided by a Soviet scholar, Y.V. Gankovsky seems to be plausible. According to him, in the mid-second millennium B.C. a serious internal crisis, overtook the Northern region – including Haryana. This was owing to the whetting of social contradictions as a result of the expansion of slavery, debt, incongruity between the level of development or productive forces, and exploitation and probably authoritarianism on the part of the socio-political superstructure which crowned the edifice of the Siswal Harrapan civilization. This crisis seems ultimately to have resulted in the fall of these great people.

The Aryans were a dynamic people; they were liberal and assimilative. They were hard working and for sure had hardly any social contradictions in their life. As a result, they made rapid progress in every field of life. The development of productive-forces, e.g. the emergence of iron and iron tools, helped them a great deal to husband new uninhabited areas, improve irrigational cultivation and advance different kinds of handicraft and farming. Brahmavarta, the central abode of these people, became the cradle of the Indian civilization. Here the bulk of theVedic literature was composed; National values, norms and ideas were formed; and standards of behaviour and social intercourse were devised. The entire country looked up to the people of this region for guidance and followed them. Even Manu admits this in his celebrated Smriti.

In the later Vedic period, the region came to lose some of its pristine glory. The centre of Aryan activity shifted to the valley of the Ganga. But this situation lasted only for a short period. In the so-called epic age, the region again came to limelight. The Bharata War was fought here during the course of which the immortal message of Gita was delivered. Besides this, several other works were also composed here.

The decline of the Kurus after the Bharata War brought in many tribes in the region who mixed up with and became part and parcel of the original settlers. This mix-up gave the people singular breath and energy which made them sturdy agriculturists and cattle breeders and strong fighters .

On the political front a republican tribe, Mattamayurs, whom Nakula had vanquished in his digvijaya before the Bharata War gained supremacy in this period. The leader of this tribe around 320 B.C. was Chandragupta. In the post-Alexander period, this bellicose son of Mauryas carved out a mighty kingdom for himself and shifted his capital to Pataliputra. He and his successors gave good Government, but the life of the masses seems to have degenerated a great deal in this period. The varna system appears to have undergone radical changes. The principle of equality of man at the time of birth and acquisition of social status by dint of merit in later life was done away with. Brahmanas assumed great power and their injunctions became socio-religious authority which none could dare to defy Jainism and Buddhism which came to this region in the sixth century B.C. strove to effect some change in this situation. But owing to several factors which are outside the scope of this paper for discussion, the reforming orders achieved precious little and became almost an extinct force after some time.

After the fall of the Mauryas (187 B.C.), the Yaudheyas, a very powerful republican tribe of Rohtak and the Agras of Agroha formed independent kingdoms. A large number of Yaudheya coins have been found here from various sites. Agra coins are not so frequent, however. These heroic people fought with the foreign invaders like the Indo-Greeks, the Shakas and the Kushanas. They suffered defeat in the struggle but never gave up hope of recovering their lost freedom. Ultimately they triumphed. However, Samudra Gupta, the powerful king of the Guptas again subjugated them about A.D. 350. The Guptas1 hold over them continued until the death of the bellicose Skandagupta. Then the Hunas ransacked the country and chaos and confusion prevailed all around. Haryana, with other parts of Northern India, was thrown into a melting pot. But fortunately, at this juncture, a son of the soil, Harshavardhana of the Pushpabhuti dynasty elbowed his way to power (A.D. 606) and restored order not only in Haryana but in almost the whole of Northern India. This “good reign came to a close in A.D. 647 when Harsha died.

Once again there was chaos a nd confusion. Many powerful feudal chiefs came to fill the void. The Pratiharas and Tomaras got some success for a while, and so did the Chauhans who came after them. But the onslaught of the Turk and Afghan invaders from north-west broke their backbone.

In 1206 Qutbuddin Aibak sat on the throne of Delhi and laid the foundations of the Turkish rule in India. He, as also his successors, the so-called Sultans of Delhi belonging to different dynasties, in most of the cases, maltreated their subjects; they showed religious intolerance; and effected economic exploitation of the worst type. In consequence, the people became hostile to them, and whenever their haqumat showed any sign of weakness or disruption, the sturdy Meos, Ahirs, Rajputs, Gujars and Jats of Haryana rose in open rebellion against them. At the people s level, however, the two communities – Hindus and Muslims – lived in harmony.

In 1526 Babar occupied Haryana. He kept tight control over the region. But still the brave people of Haryana, especially the Mandhars of Kaithal region, rose against him and gave him trouble. His son Humayun was not destined to stay here for long; the Surs took advantage of the situation and ousted him. After some time the Surs1 fortunes also dwindled. Hemu, a Bhargava general of Rewari came on the scene for a while : he held charge of Delhi and Haryana until he lost them to Akbar in 1556. Akbar proved to be an enlightened monarch. He and his successors Indianized themselves, followed liberal policy, showed retigious tolerance and revised their revenue policy. In consequence, the people liked them. However, Aurangzeb who deviated from this path was opposed by them, especially by the Satnamis and the Jats. And same was the case during the later-Mughal times when a number of feudal lords appeared on the scene and subjected the people to severe exploitation. The weak haqims were not cared for by the brave people, especially the peasants in the region, as is attested by the following couplet.

In 1803, the British appeared on the scene. It is generally believed that except for a few persons whose material interests were directly affected, the general masses did not oppose the British rule (in their respective lands) in India; rather they welcomed it as heralding the dawn of peace, prosperity and security (R. C. Majumdar). This belief, at least in the case of Haryana, does not stand historical scrutiny : the people in this region, hundreds and thousands of them from every walk of life came forward to oppose the British when they came to occupy their land in 1803 with obstinate valour which has ever characterised them. A long-struggle went on. In 1809, however, they yielded in the face of great opposition on the part of the Birtish. But this does not mean that the foreign domination was accepted once for all by them : whenever and wherever the British hold seemed easier to break, the people did not lose chance and rose in revolt against them. The following revolts bear out this truth : Chhachhrauli Revolt of 1810 and 1818; Rania Revolt of 1818; Peasants Revolt, of 1824; Revolt of Prince Pratap Singh of Jind.

Balawali Revolt of 1835-36; Murder of William Fraser, 1835; Kaithal Revolt of 1843; Revolt of Ajit Singh of Ladwa, and other Sikh chiefs, 1845-46.

These revolts were not doubt suppressed by the British, but they seem to have achieved little success in crushing the spirit of the people. This is amply proved by the happenings of 1857: when the people got the news of the outbreak of the Uprising, they seized the opportunity with both hands and played a very significant role in the struggle. By June-July they had freed almost entire Haryana from the British hold. But as elsewhere, the Haryanvis failed in the struggle.

After the end of the Uprising although the famous proclamation of Queen Victoria (1859) announced better treatment to the people, yet the British Sahibs wreaked vengeance on the people of Haryana. Their region was tagged vengeance on the people of Haryana. Their region was tagged with Punjab vide the Government of India Notification No. 606 of 13 April, 1858 where they suffered punishment of the worst type for taking active part in the Uprising. As a result, they became poor and backward in every walk of life.

For many years there was no political activity in the region. The Wahabis raised their heads in 1860 s but they were also suppressed. The situation was so hopeless that even the new winds of change” which brought political awakening to most of the regions in India in the later part of the nineteenth century, especially after the foundation of the Indian National Congress (1885), had little effect here for quite some time. But in the succeeding century things improved. especially under the influence of the Arya Samaj which for several reasons, was very popular here. Thanks to the Samaj propaganda new ideas spread, and people began to inculcate in their hearts love of their country (Bharatmata). Some educated persons joined the Indian National Congress. Babu Murlidhar of Ambala was the most prominent among them. Murlidhar was one of the founders of the Indian National Congress. Lala Lajpat Rai lived in Hisar those days. He, too, played a big role in making Congress popular here.

After 1919 when the Congress, thanks to Gandhiji s dynamic leadership, started mass agitation and movement for Swaraj, the people of Haryana came out. stood under its flag and fought the British imperialism with confidence and converge. The struggle was long and tough, harsh and hurtful. But they did not mind suffering for a noble cause – freedom of their motherland. Their efforts as also of their counter parts living in other states, bore fruits and India got her freedom on 15 August 1947.

The people were mighty pleased. They thought and rightly of course, that their age-old dreams will be fulfilled now. But unfortunately, it did not happen. Being a part of Punjab, they suffered discrimination and neglect at the hands of their big brother . They raised their voice against injustice and demanded a separate state for themselves. As a result, the state of Haryana came into being on 1 November, 1966.

In their new world; the simple, bold, hardworking Haryanavis made strenuous effort at making good the inadequacies, absences and lacks for their life. In consequence, the state became one of the richest states in the country. There was all round development and per capita income increased manifold. The 1934 back region of yester years became an affluent forward-looking state – the state where action is.

That is material development. The cultural aspect of life has, regretably not progressed on desired lines. There are many reasons for this lack. But good quality education, healthy exposure, and such like things will, it is hoped, effect improvement here, too, before long.

K. C. Yadav
Formerly Proferssor of History,
Kurukshetra University, Kurukshetra


Profile
Maharishi Dayanand University, Rohtak set up by an Act of Legislative Assembly of Haryana in the year 1976. The Univesity has been named after Maharishi Dayanand Saraswati.

Statutory body of University Grants Commission (UGC), NAAC has accredited B++ grade to the university. The University has listed remarkable success in his expansion programmes, infrastructural developments and in academic excellence.

77 different academic programmes under various departments are being successfully conducted by the University. In addition to the main campus at Rohtak, University has two satellite campuses at Rewari and Gurgaon.

Around 1.70 lacs students have enrolled themselves with the university under different programmes. It has 126 affiliating institutions and colleges under its control.

University also runs Directorate of Distance Education with an enrolment of 4500 students under various professional and non professional courses.

Facilities:
Since the campus is huge and sprawling, there are a lot of facilities for the students such as a good library for different fields, and hospitals and residential buildings for students and members of the faculty.

Colleges affiliated with this University

Total number of colleges affiliated with this University = 467
1 Aaryan College of Education, Lakhan Majra Village
2 Adarsh College of Education, Siwani Mandi
3 Adarsh College of Education, Kailana Village
4 Adarsh College of Education, Dadanpur Village
5 Adarsh Mahila Mahavidyalaya, Bhiwani
6 Aditya College of Education, Charkhi Dadri
7 Advanced Centre for Bio-Technology, Rohtak
8 Advanced Institute of Education, Aurangabad
9 Advanced Institute of Pharmacy, Aurangabad
10 Advanced Institute of Technology and Management, Aurangabad
11 Advanced Institute of Technology and Management for Women, Aurangabad
12 Aggarwal College of Education, Hodal
13 Aggarwal Post Graduate College, Ballabgarh
14 Ahir College, Rewari
15 Al-Falah School of Education and Training, Dhauj
16 Al-Falah School of Engineering and Technology (AFSET), Faridabad
17 All India Jat Heroes Memorial College, Rohtak
18 AM College of Education, Majra Sheoraj
19 Amity Business School, Gurgaon
20 Anupama College of Engineering, Gurgaon
21 Anupama Institute of Management, Bhora Kalan Village
22 Apeejay College of Engineering, Sohna
23 Apeejay Saraswati Post Graduate College for Girls, Charkhi Dadri
24 Applied College of Management and Engineering (ACME), Faridabad
25 ARAVALI COLLEGE OF ADVANCED STUDIES IN EDUCATION, Pali Village
26 Aravali College of Education, Kartota VILLAGE
27 Aravali College of Education, Khod VILLAGE
28 Aravali College of Engineering and Management, Faridabad
29 ARYA COLLEGE OF EDUCATION, Farmana
30 Arya College of Education, Mohindergarh
31 Aryavart College of Education, Adampur Dadhi Village
32 Aryawart College of Eduation, Khanda VILLAGE
33 AS Kharb Memorial College of Education, Kasni VILLAGE
34 BABA JAI RAM DASS COLLEGE OF EDUCATION, Khatod Village
35 Baba Jai Ram Dass College of Education, Mohindergarh
36 BABA KHETA NATH COLLEGE OF EDUCATION, Sihma Village
37 BABA MOHAN DASS COLLEGE OF EDUCATION, Motla Kalan Village
38 Baba Mungipa Vidya Peeth Education College, Bushan Village
39 Baba Siddhnath College of Education, Bhandwa VILLAGE
40 Balaji College of Education, Ballabgarh
41 Banwari Lal Jindal Suiwala College, Tosham
42 Basant Lal Memorial College of Education, Gurgaon
43 Bhagwan Mahavir College of Education, Kundli
44 Bhagwan Parshu Ram College of Education, Bali Brahmanan Nangal Village
45 Bhagwan Parshu Ram College of Engneering, Gohana
46 Bharat Institute of Technology, Sonepat (Sonipat)
47 Bharat Vidyapeeth College of Education, Kasandi VILLAGE
48 BHARTIYA COLLEGE OF EDUCATION, Mohindergarh
49 Bhartiyam College of Education, Panehra Khurd Village
50 Bhiwani Institute of Technology and Sciences (BITS), Bhiwani
51 BK College of Education, Bawani Khera
52 BL College of Education, Wazirlpur
53 BM College of Technology and Management, Hari Nagar(Dumha) Village
54 BM Institute of Engineering and Technology, Fazilpur
55 BR College of Education, Sehlang
56 BRCM College of Engineering and Technology, Bahal
57 Bright College of Education, Kitlana
58 Brown Hills College of Technology, Dhauj
59 BS Anangpuria Institute of Education, Alampur Village
60 BS Anangpuria Institute of Law, Faridabad
61 BS Anangpuria Institute of Pharmacy, Faridabad
62 BS Anangpuria Institute of Technology and Management, Faridabad
63 BS College of Education, Narnaul
64 Cambridge College of Education (For Girls) Birar Briar Village, Jhajjar
65 Capt Hardev Singh College of Education, Rohtak
66 Career Institute of Technology and Management (CITM), Faridabad
67 CCAS Jain Girls College, Ganaur
68 CCMC, Dehradun
69 Ch Bansi Lal Government College for Women, Tosham
70 Ch Dhajja Ram Janta Mahavidyalya, Butana
71 Ch Katar Singh College of Education, Gudha VILLAGE
72 CH PRATAP SINGH MEMORIAL COLLEGE OF EDUCATION, Gurgaon
73 Chandravati College of Education, Tauru
74 Chhotu Ram Arya College, Sonepat (Sonipat)
75 Chhotu Ram College of Education, Rohtak
76 CL College of Education, Narnaul
77 Darsh Institute of Engineering and Technology, Kailana Village
78 Dashmesh College of Physiotherapy, Budhera Village
79 DAV Centenary College, Faridabad
80 DAV College of Education, Hassangarh
81 DAV College of Engineering and Technology, Kanina
82 DAV College of Management, Rohtak
83 DAV Girls College, Kosli Village
84 DAV Institute of Management, Faridabad
85 DAYAWANTI MEMORIAL COLLEGE OF EDUCATION, Panchgaon
86 DC Jain College of Education, Sonepat (Sonipat)
87 Deen Dayal Rustogi College of Education, Khandewla Village
88 Deep Institute of Engineering and Technology, Gurgaon
89 Degree College for Women (Mahila Mahavidyalaya), Jhojhu Kalan Village
90 Dehat Vikas Institute of Education and Technology, Tigaon
91 Delhi College of Technology and Management, Palwal
92 Delhi Global Business School, Faridabad
93 Delhi Institute of Technology and Management, Sonepat (Sonipat)
94 Disha College of Education, Mp Majra Village
95 DRONA COLLEGE OF EDUCATION, Kadipur
96 Dronacharya College of Engineering (DCE), Gurgaon
97 Dronacharya Government College, Gurgaon
98 DS Arya College of Education, Patel Nagar Village
99 DVM College of Education, Baluda VILLAGE
100 Echelon Institute of Technology, Neahrpur
101 Faridabad Institute Technology, Faridabad
102 Ganga Institute of Architecture and Town Planning, Jhajjar
103 Ganga Institute of Technology and Management for Women, Kablana
104 Ganpati College of Education, Bhori VILLAGE
105 Ganpati Institute of Education and Technology, Karoll Village
106 Gateway College of Architecture and Design, Sonepat (Sonipat)
107 Gauarav College of Education, Azam Nagar Village
108 Gaur Brahman Ayurvedic College and Hospital, Brahman Vaas
109 Gaur Brahman College of Education, Rohtak
110 Gaur Brahman Degree College, Rohtak
111 Geeta College of Education, Butana Kundu
112 GGD SD College, Palwal
113 Gita Vidya Mandir Girls College, Sonepat (Sonipat)
114 Global Institute of Technology and Management, Khera Khurampur
115 Gold Field College of Education, Faridabad
116 Gold Field Institute of Technology and Management, Faridabad
117 Gopal Sharma Modern Vidya Niketan Institute of Engineering and Technology, Palwal
118 Government College, Hodal
119 Government College, Bawal
120 Government College, Sidhrawali
121 Government College, Badli
122 Government College, Ateli
123 Government College, Siwani Mandi
124 Government College, Tigaon
125 Government College, Narnaul
126 Government College, Nangal Chaudhary
127 Government College, Bhiwani
128 Government College, Jatauly Hailey Mandi
129 Government College, Krishan Nagar
130 Government College, Dujana
131 Government College, Dubaldhan
132 Government College, Loharu Village (Bhiwani)
133 Government College, Bound Kalan
134 Government College, Nahar
135 Government College, Birohar
136 Government College, Nagina
137 Government College, Meham
138 Government College, Mohindergarh
139 Government College, Gurgaon
140 Government College, Bahadurgarh
141 Government College, Gohana
142 Government College (Sector 9), Gurgaon
143 Government College for Women, Rohtak
144 Government College for Women, Mohindergarh
145 Government College for Women, Faridabad
146 Government College for Women, Rewari
147 Government College for women,Narnaul, Narnaul
148 Government College of Education, Narnaul
149 Government College of Education, Bhiwani
150 Government College, Jhajjar, Jhajjar
151 Government Dental College, Rohtak
152 Government Girls College, Bhiwani
153 Green Meadows College of Education, Charkhi
154 Green Valley College of Education, Titoli VILLAGE
155 GS College of Education Luhari, Jhajjar
156 Gurgaon College of Engineering, Gurgaon
157 Gurgaon College of Engineering for Women, Gurgaon
158 Gurgaon Institute of Technology and Management, Gurgaon
159 Guru College of Education, Satnali Village
160 GVM College of Education for Women, Sonepat (Sonipat)
161 GVM College Of Pharmacy, Sonepat (Sonipat)
162 GVM Institute of Technology and Management (GVM Girls College), Sonepat (Sonipat)
163 Happy College of Education, Kosli Village
164 Happy College of Education, Mohindergarh
165 Harsh College of Education, Ganaur
166 HARYANA COLLEGE OF EDUCATION, Dhani Village
167 Haryana Institute of Education, Bahadurgarh
168 Haryana Institute of Technology, Bahadurgarh
169 HD College of Education, Sahlawas VILLAGE
170 Hindu College, Sonepat (Sonipat)
171 Hindu College of Education, Sonepat (Sonipat)
172 Hindu College of Education, Loharu Village (Bhiwani)
173 Hindu College of Engineering (HCE), Sonepat (Sonipat)
174 Hindu College of Pharmacy, Sonepat (Sonipat)
175 Hindu Girls College, Sonepat (Sonipat)
176 Hindu Institute of Management (HIM), Sonepat (Sonipat)
177 Hindu Institute of Management and Technology, Rohtak
178 Hitkar College of Education, Mandola Village
179 HL Goyal Government College, Tauru
180 HN College of Education, Sanga VILLAGE
181 IB WOMEN COLLEGE OF EDUCATION and MANAGEMENT, Rohtak
182 INDER PRASTHA EDUCATION COLLEGE, Rohtak
183 INDUS COLLEGE OF EDUCATION, Asthal Bohar
184 Institute of Law and Management Studies (ILMS), Gurgaon
185 Institute of Management and Technology, Faridabad, Faridabad
186 Institute of Teacher Education, Ballabgarh
187 Institute of Technology of Sciences, Paluwas Village
188 IP College of Education, Jasia VILLAGE
189 IPJ College of Education, Ismaila VILLAGE
190 IPS College of Education Research and Technology, Rohtak
191 IPS School of Management and Education, Rohtak
192 ITM University, Formerly Institute of Technology and Management, Gurgaon
193 Jagriti Institute of Higher Education, Mohna Village
194 Janta Vidya Mandir Ganpat Rai Rasiwasia College, Charkhi Dadri
195 JAWAHAR NEHRU COLLEGE OF EDUCATION, Gohana
196 Jeevan Jyoti College of Education, Chhajju Nagar Village
197 Jhankar College of Education, Farukhnagar
198 Jindal College of Education, Sohna
199 JK Memorial College of Education, Birhi Kalan Village
200 JLJ Financial and Management Consultant Pvt Ltd, Faridabad
201 JR Kisan Homeopathic Medical College, Asthal Bohar
202 JR Kissan College of Education, Rohtak
203 JR Memorial College of Education, Rewari
204 JVMGRR Institute of Computer Applications, Charkhi Dadri
205 Kamrah Institute of Information Technology, Gurgaon
206 Kanya Mahavidyalya, Kharkhoda
207 KCM Army College of Education, Bhiwani
208 KD College of Education, Dhani Bhatuta Village
209 KD College of Education, Pali
210 Kedarnath Aggarwal Institute of Management, Charkhi Dadri
211 KIIT College of Education, Bhondsi
212 KIIT College of Engineering, Gurgaon
213 Kirorimal College of Education, Khewram
214 Kirti College of Education, Anayat VILLAGE
215 Kishan Lal Public College (KLP College), Rewari
216 Kissan College of Education, Meham
217 KL College of Education, Dohki VILLAGE
218 KL Mehta DN College for Women, Faridabad
219 KM College of Edcuation, Bhiwani
220 KR College of Education, Fatehpur
221 Krishan Lal Public College, Rewari
222 Krishana College of Education, Bhotwas VILLAGE
223 Krishana Education Research and Technological Institute, Bhanderi Village
224 Krishna Adarsh College of Education, Jatusana
225 KVM College of Education, Rohtak
226 KVM Nursing College, Rohtak
227 Lal Bahadur Shastri College of Education, Jamalpur
228 Laxmi College of Education, Rathiwas
229 Laxmi College of Education, Maneshar Village
230 Les Fills MVN Institute of Engineering and Technology, Palwal
231 Lingayas Institute of Technology and Management for Women, Kanwara
232 Lingyas Institute of Management and Technology, Nauchauli Village
233 Lingyas Paradise Nursing College, Rohtak
234 Lord Krishana College of Eduation, Jamalpur
235 LORD SHIVA COLLEGE OF EDUCATION, Lahli Village
236 Lt Mahipat Singh College of Education, Sarai Aurangabad Village
237 Maa Ganga College of Education, Dujana
238 Maa Omwati College of Education, Hassanpur Village
239 Maa Saraswati Teachers Training Institute, Makdola
240 Maharaja Aggrasen College for Women, Jhajjar
241 Maharana Pratap College of Education, Dhanonda
242 Maharana Pratap College of Education for Women, Paluwas Village
243 Maharani Kishori Jat Kanya Mahavidyalaya, Rohtak
244 Major Nafe Singh Kungariya College of Education, Bhiwani
245 Management Education and Research Institute(MERI), Asanda
246 Manav Rachana Dental College, Faridabad
247 Manav Rachna College of Engineering (MRCE), Faridabad
248 Mange Ram Womens College of Education, Purkhas
249 MARC College of Education, Lohani Village
250 MATA BHIMESHWARI DEVI COLLEGE OF EDUCATION, Baithiyan Panna
251 Mata Vaishnu Devi College of Education, Rewari
252 Matu Ram Institute of Engineering and Management, Rohtak
253 MD College of Education, Sarai Aurangabad Village
254 Meenakshi College of Education, Ballabgarh
255 MKM College of Education for Women, Hodal
256 MLR Saraswati College of Education, Charkhi Dadri
257 Modern College of Education, Bhojawas VILLAGE
258 Modern College of Education, Dev Nagar Village
259 Modern College of Education, Gohana
260 MR College of Education, Dublana
261 MR College of Education, Hassanpur Village
262 MR College of Education, Faridabad
263 MR DAV College of Education, Rohtak
264 MR DAV Institute of Management Studies, Rohtak
265 MR Nauhnty College of Education, Kherka Gujjar
266 MRK Institute of Engineering and Technology, Rewari
267 MT College of Education, Kharhar
268 Mukhi College of Education, Gohana
269 Murari Lal Rasiwasia Ayurvedic College and Hospital, Charkhi Dadri
270 Narayana College of Education, Kutana Shiv Nagar Village
271 National College of Education, Lohani Village
272 National Institute of Law, Faridabad
273 National Power Training Institute (NPTI), Faridabad
274 Navyug College for Education, Prabhu Nagar
275 Netaji Subash Chander Bose College of Education, Charkhi Dadri
276 Netaji Subhash College of Education, Jahangirpur VILLAGE
277 NGF College of Engineering and Technology, Aurangabad
278 NIAM Institute of Applied Management, Faridabad
279 Nirankari Baba Gurbachan Singh Memorial College (NBGSM), Sohna
280 NS College of Education, Sonepat (Sonipat)
281 Oxford College of Education, Gurgaon
282 Panchsheel Institute of Education Research and Education, Jatwara
283 Paradise College of Education, Kharkhoda
284 Paramount College of Education, Chhuchhakwas
285 Pataudi College of Education, Pataudi
286 PDM College of Education, Bahadurgarh
287 PDM College of Engineering, Bahadurgarh
288 PDM College of Pharmacy, Sarai Aurangabad Village
289 PDM Dental College And Research Institute, Bahadurgarh
290 Pitamah Umda Singh College of Education, Dhanaunda
291 Pitaman Kahan Singh Degree College, Kanina
292 PM College of Engineering, Sonepat (Sonipat)
293 Post Graduate Regional Centre (PG Regional Centre), Mirpur Village
294 Pragya College of Education, Bahadurgarh
295 Progressive Learning College of Education, Jaunawas VILLAGE
296 Pt BD Sharma Post Graduate Institute of Medical Sciences, Rohtak
297 Pt BD Sharma Post Graduate Institute of Medical Sciences, College of Nursing, Rohtak
298 Pt JLN Government College, Faridabad
299 Pt Neki Ram Government College for Boys, Rohtak
300 Pt Sita Ram Shastri B Ed Training College, Bhiwani
301 Public Girls College, Rewari
302 Pujya Swami Vivekanand College of Education, Sonepat (Sonipat)
303 Raj College of Education, Brahman Vaas
304 Rajesh Pilot Memorial College of Education, Naryan Village
305 Ram Gopal College of Pharmacy, Sultanpur
306 Ram Jas College of Education, Sonepat (Sonipat)
307 Ram Krishna College of Education, Meham
308 Ramanujan College of Education, Mitrol Village
309 Ramanujan College of Management, Mitrol Village
310 Ranjit Singh Memorial College of Education and Technology, Chhara Village
311 Rao Abhay Singh College of Education, Gangoli (Saharanwas)
312 RAO ADAL SINGH COLLEGE OF EDUCATION, Khatiwas Village
313 Rao Birender Singh College of Education, Rewari
314 Rao Khem Chand College of Education, Bohatwas Ahir Village
315 Rao Lal Singh College of Education, Mohindergarh
316 Rao Mohar Singh College of Education, Jatauli VILLAGE
317 Rao Mohar Singh College of Education, Behrampur Village
318 Rao Mool Chand College of Education, Khatoti Kalan Village
319 Rao Neki Ram Memorial College of Education, Turkapur VILLAGE
320 Rao Nihal Singh College of Education, Jhajjar
321 RAO PAHLAD SINGH COLLEGE OF EDUCATION, Khatod Village
322 Rao Pahlad Singh College of Engineering and Technology, Bolana VILLAGE
323 Rao Ram Singh College of Education, Bhora Kalan Village
324 Rao Ranjeet Singh College of Education, Bodia Kamalpur Village
325 Rao Sultan Singh College of Education, Nimbhera VILLAGE
326 Rao Udmi Ram Memorial College of Education, Jamalpur
327 Rashtriya College of Education, Rohtak
328 Rastiriya Vidya Educational College, Gurgaon
329 Rattan Institute of Technology and Management, Saveli Village
330 Rattan Singh Girls College of Education, Harphala Seekri
331 Ravindra Bharti College of Education, Jhajjar
332 RD College of Education, Atali Village
333 Rise Max College of Education, Jharsaintly Village
334 RITNAND BALVED EDUCATION FOUNDATION (RBEF) Amity School of Physical Studies and Sports Sciences, Manesar
335 RK College of education, Humayunpur
336 RK College of Education, Bhora Kalan Village
337 RLS College of Education, Sidhrawali
338 RN Engineering and Management College for Women, Markrauli Kalan Village
339 Rohtak Institute of Engineering and Management, Rohtak
340 Royal Institute of Management and Technology, Chidana VILLAGE
341 Royal Institute of Science and Management, Gurgaon
342 RPS College of Education, Khor Village
343 Sai Mohan College of Education, Faridabad
344 Saini College, Rohtak
345 Saini Institute of Girls Education, Chunipura
346 Sanskriti College of Education, Rohtak
347 Sanskriti Institute of Education and Technology, Amarpur
348 Sant Jai Ram Dass College of Education, Mohindergarh
349 Sant Roshan Lal College of Education (Women), Dhani Mahu
350 Saraswati College of Eduation, Mandola VILLAGE
351 Saraswati College of Education, Majra Kalan Village
352 Saraswati College of Education, Shora Kothi
353 Saraswati College of Education, Sehlang
354 Saraswati Mahila Mahavidyalaya, Faridabad
355 Saraswati Vidya Mandirs College of Education, Ferozepur Jhirka
356 Saraswati Vidya Mandirs College of Education, Meham
357 Sardar Patel College of Education, Farukh Nagar (Gurgaon)
358 Sarv Hind College of Education, Gurawara VILLAGE
359 Sarvodaya College of Eduaction, Khanpur Khurd
360 Sat Jinda Kalyana College, Rohtak
361 Sat Jinda Kalyana College of Education, Kalanaur
362 Sat Priya College of Education, Rohtak
363 Sat Priya Institute of Engineering and Technology, Rohtak
364 Sat Priya Institute of Management Studies and Research, Rohtak
365 Sat Priya School of Architecture and Design, Rohtak
366 Satish Public College of Education, Rewari
367 Satya College of Engineering and Technology, Mitrol Village
368 Satyug Darshan Institute of Education and Research (For Women), Faridabad
369 Savera College of Architecture, Gurgaon
370 SD College of Education, Isharwal
371 SD Memorial College of Education, Jhajjar
372 Sehrawat Degree College of Education, Hathin VILLAGE
373 Sh Balwant Technology and Management, Sonepat (Sonipat)
374 Sh Shanti Sagar Jain Kanya Mahavidyalya, Ferozpur Jhirka
375 Shaheed Capt DK Khosla College of Education, Zainabad Village
376 Shambhu Dayal College of Education, Sonepat (Sonipat)
377 Sharbati College of Education, Mohindergarh
378 Sharbati College of Nursing, Mohindergarh
379 Sharvan Institute of Special Education and Research, Gandhinagar
380 Sheela Devi Institute of Management and Technology, Zaffarpur VILLAGE
381 Sheetla College of Education, Lakhan Majra Village
382 Shiksha Bharti Colege of Education, Sisoth Migarh Village
383 Shiksha Bharti College of Education, Mohana VILLAGE
384 Shiv Chaitanya College of Education, Bhora Kalan Village
385 Shiv College of Education, Faridabad
386 Shiv Karan College of Education, Matindu VILLAGE
387 Shree Ram College of Education, Bidhlan VILLAGE
388 Shri Baba Mast Nath Ayurvedic College, Asthal Bohar
389 Shri Baba Mast Nath College of Physiotherapy, Asthal Bohar
390 Shri Baba Mast Nath Engineering College (SBMNEC), Rohtak
391 Shri Baba Mast Nath Institute of Educational Training and Research, Asthal Bohar
392 Shri Baba Mast Nath Institute of Management Studies and Research, Asthal Bohar
393 Shri Baba Mast Nath Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences and Research, Asthal Bohar
394 Shri Balaji College of Education, Sampla
395 Shri Duli Chand Saini (DCS) College of Education, Sonepat (Sonipat)
396 Shri Ganesh College of Education, Bali Brahmanan Nangal Village
397 Shri Krishan College of Education, Mohindergarh
398 Shri Krishana Government College, Kanwali
399 Shri Krishna College of Education, Atela
400 Shri Krishna Sports College, Mohindergarh
401 Shri LN Hindu College, Rohtak
402 Shri Maru Singh Memorial Mahila Vishwavidyalaya, Khanpur Kalan
403 Shri Ram College of Education, Bhora Kalan Village
404 Shri Ram College of Engineering and Management, Palwal
405 Shri Sai Baba College of Education, Jahangirpur VILLAGE
406 SHRI SHANTI SAGAR JAIN GIRLS COLLEGE OF EDUCATION, Jhirka
407 Shyam College of Education, Panhera Kalan Village
408 Sir Chhotu Ram Government College for Girls, Sampla
409 SLD GIRLS COLLEGE OF EDUCATION, Chhaprawla Village
410 Smt Bhagwani Memorial Institute of Higher Education, Ballabgarh
411 Smt Santra Devi College of Education, Samsaspur Village
412 Smt Shanti Devi Law College, Rewari
413 Somany Institute of Technology and Management (SITM), Rewari
414 SOUTH POINT COLLEGE OF EDUCATION, Jawahari VILLAGE
415 South Point Women Institute of Engineering and Technology, Jawahari VILLAGE
416 SP College of Education, Rewari
417 SR College of Education, Kheri Sadh
418 Sri Govind Singh Tricentenary (SGT) Dental College Hospital and Research Institute, Budhera Village
419 Sri Ram College of Education, Mohindergarh
420 SS College of Education, Mehmudpur Village
421 SS College of Education, Kutana Shiv Nagar Village
422 St Luke College of Education, Chandpur VILLAGE
423 St Paul College of Education, Rohtak
424 St Thomas Management Institute, Jahangirpur VILLAGE
425 Starex College of Education, Gurgaon
426 Sudha Rustagi College of Dental Sciences and Research,Faridabad, Faridabad
427 Sun Rise College of Education, Nangal Kalan Village
428 Sunil Gugnani Memorial College of Education, Rohtak
429 SURAJ COLLEGE OF EDUCATION, Bucholi Village
430 Suraj College of Engineering and Technology, Bucholi Village
431 SWAMI DAYA MUNI VIDYAPEETH COLLEEE OF EDUCATION, Kalanaur
432 Swami Vivekanand College of Education, Mahram Pur Village
433 SWARANJALI COLLEGE OF EDUCATION, Chhuriwas
434 Tagore College of Education, Majra Khurd Village
435 Tagore College of Education, Barwa Village
436 Tau Devi Lal Government College for Women, Murthal
437 Technological Institute of Textile and Sciences, Bhiwani
438 Tek Chand Mann College of Engineering, Sonepat (Sonipat)
439 Tika Ram Girls College, Sonepat (Sonipat)
440 TR College of Education, Sonepat (Sonipat)
441 Vaish Arya Kanya Shikshan Mahavidyalya, Bahadurgarh
442 Vaish College, Bhiwani
443 Vaish College, Rohtak
444 Vaish College of Education, Rohtak, Rohtak
445 Vaish College Of Engineering, Rohtak
446 Vaish Institute of Management and Technology, Rohtak
447 Vaish Institute of Pharmaceutical Education and Research, Rohtak
448 Vaish Mahila Mahavidyalaya, Rohtak
449 VB College of Education, Rohtak
450 Venkteshwara College of Education, Rajpur Village
451 VIDYA BHAVAN COLLEGE OF EDUCATION, Khurrampur
452 Vigya College of Education, Loharu Village (Bhiwani)
453 Vikramaditya College of Education, Rohtak
454 VIKRAMADITYA GROUP OF EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTE, Morkheri
455 VIVEKANAD COLLEGE OF EDUCATION, Dahina Village
456 Vivekanand College of Education, Jolahka
457 Vivekanand Institute of Professional Studies, Faridabad
458 VMC Mahila Vidyapeeth Degree College, Vishakhapatnam (Vizag Waltair)
459 Women College of Education, Jhojhu Kalan Village
460 World College of Technology and Management, Gurgaon
461 World Institute of Technology, Sohna Bhirawati
462 Yaduvanshi Institute of Education, Narnaul
463 Yaduvansi College of Education, Salimabad
464 Yash College of Education, Roorkee (Rurki)
465 Yasin Meo Degree College Nuh, Mewat
466 YMCA Institute of Engineering, Faridabad

467 YPS MEMORIAL COLLEGE OF EDUCATION, Kakroki Sardara

Tags: ,

Comments are closed