Jammu & Kashmir High Court – Srinagar Bench
Manzoor Ahmad Dar S/O: Assadullah Dar vs U.T Of J&K Through Secretary To Govt on 9 May, 2025
Author: Sanjeev Kumar
Bench: Sanjeev Kumar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
AT SRINAGAR
Reserved on: 24.04.2025.
Pronounced on: 09.05.2025
WP(C) No. 1741/2022
1. MANZOOR AHMAD DAR S/O: ASSADULLAH DAR
R/O: LARIYAR, TRAL, DISTRICT: PULWAMA.
2. RASHID HAMEED GUROO, S/O: ABDUL HAMEED
GUROO, R/O: GHAT TOKUNA, TEHSIL AWANTIPORA,
DISTRICT PULWAMA.
3. RUBINA ASHARAF, D/O: MOHAMMAD ASHRAF DAR,
R/O: BADERMUNA, TEHSIL DOORU, DISTRICT
ANANTNAG.
...PETITIONER(S)
Through: - Mr. Jahangir Iqbal Ganaie, Sr. Advocate with
Ms. Mehnaz Rather, Advocate
Vs.
1. U.T OF J&K THROUGH SECRETARY TO GOVT
GENERAL ADMINSTRATION DEPARTMENT, CIVIL
SECRETARIAT SRINGAR/JAMMU.
2. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT SCHOOL EDUCATION
DEPARTMENT, CIVIL SECRETARIAT
SRINAGAR/JAMMU.
3. JAMMU AND KASHMIR, SERVICE SELECTION BOARD
THROUGH SECRETARY SEHKARI BHAWAN, RALL
HEAD, JAMMU.
4. CHAIRMAN JAMMU AND KASHMIR SERVICE
SELECTION BOARD THROUGH ITS SECRETARY,
SEHKARI BHAWAN, RALL HEAD, JAMMU.
5. DIRECTOR SCHOOL EDUCATION, KASHMIR,
SRINAGAR.
6. UNIVERSITY GRANTS COMMISSION THROUGH ITS
SECRETARY BAHADUR SHAH ZAFFAR MARG, NEW
DELHI 11000.
7. UNIVERSITY OF KASHMIR THROUGH ITS REGISTRAR
HAZRATBAL, SRINAGAR.
8. MEHRAJ-UD DIN WANI S/O: GULAM MOHI-UD-DIN
WANI
R/O: PULWAMA.
MIR ARIF MANZOOR
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this document
13.05.25
9. IBAHAT JAN D/O: ABDUL GAFFAR JAN
R/O: PULWAMA AND ORS.
10. RAFIA GULL D/O: GHULAM MOHAMMAD BHAT
R/O: GABERPORA, PULWAMA.
11. NEELASH YOUSUF SHEIKH D/O: MOHAMMAD YOUSUF
SHEIKH
R/O: PULWAMA
12. IRFAN MUSHTAQ WANI S/O: MUSHTAQ AHMAD WANI
R/O: NAINA BATAPORA, PULWAMA.
13. MAIRAJ AHMAD SOFI S/O: ALI MOHAMMAD SOFI
R/O:TRICH KAKAPORA, PULWAMA.
14. TAIQ AHMAD DAR S/O: ABDUL RASHID DAR
R/O:AUGLAR CHIRATE, PULWAMA.
15. MEHRAJ-UD-DIN KUMAR S/O: GHULAM HASSAN
KUMAR R/O: AKINGAM ANANTNAG.
16. REFAT RASHID D/O: ABDUL RASHID SHEIKH
R/O:AKINGAM, ANANTNAG.
17. GOWSIA AMIN D/O: MOHAMMAD AMIN HARGAH
R/O:LOHERSENZI, ANANTNAG.
18. MALIK IRFAN RASHID S/O: MALIK ABDUL RASHID
R/O:FATHEPORA ANANTNAG.
19. TANVER AHMAD NAJAR S/O: GHULAM RASOOL NAJAR
R/O:WATLAR, GANDERBAL.
20. NASEER AHMAD TANTRAY S/O: BASEER AHMAD
TANTRAY R/O:MANIGAM GANDERBAL.
21. SHABIR AHMAD KHAN S/O: AB. HAMEED KHAN
R/O:BANDIPORA.
22. MOHD RAFI BHAT S/O: ASHIQ HUSSAIN BHAT
R/O:SOPORE BARAMULLA.
23. FEROZ AHMAD RESHI S/O: GH. HASSAN RESHI
R/O:WATLAB SOPORE DISTRICT BARAMULLA.
24. MAQSOOD AHMAD BHAT S/O: ABDUL AHAD BHAT
R/O:TANGMARG BARAMLLA.
25. MUDASIR BASHIR S/O: BASHIR AHMAD BHAT
R/O:PATTAN BARAMULLA.
26. MAJID KHAN S/O: FARID KHAN
R/O:GINGAL URI BARAMULLA.
MIR ARIF MANZOOR WP(C) No. 1741/2022
I attest to the accuracy and
Page No. 2
authenticity of this document
13.05.25
27. AIJAZ AHMAD DAR S/O: GHULAM QADIR DAR
R/O:TANGMARG BARAMULLA.
28. SAMEERA YOUSUF D/O: MOHD YOUSUF HAJI R/O:
TANGMARG BARAMULLA.
29. ISHARAT SOFI D/O: MOHAMMAD SHAFI KHANDI
R/O:MOHANDPORA SHOPIAN.
30. SUMAIYA SHARIEF D/O: MOHAMMAD SHARIEF
RATHER R/O: PADSHAHI BAGH, SRINAGAR.
31. MUKHTAIR AHMAD GOJER BHAT S/O: ABDUL GANI
BHAT R/O: SUNDERBRARI KOKERNAG, ANANTNAG.
...RESPONDENT(S)
Through:- Mr. Abdul Rashid Malik, Sr. AAG with
Mr. Mohd Younis Hafiz, AC for R-1 to 5.
Mr. Z.A. Shah, Sr. Advocate with
Mr. A. Hanan, Advocate for R-11 and 16.
Mr. Syed Faisal Qadiri, Sr. Advocate with
Mr. Syed Mansoor Bukhari, Advocate for R-7.
Mr. Sheikh Umar Farooq, Advocate for R-21 to 23, 25, 26 and 31.
Mr. Shahbaz Sikander, Advocate for R-6.
Mr. Bilal Ahmad Malla, Advocate for R-9 and 10.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR, JUDGE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHD YOUSUF WANI, JUDGE
JUDGMENT
Per: Sanjeev Kumar-J:
1. The petitioners, three in number, belonging to the
District of Pulwama and Anantnag, respectively, are before
this Court and invoke the extraordinary writ jurisdiction
vested in this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India to throw a challenge to an order and judgment dated
1st August 2022, passed by the Central Administrative
Tribunal, Srinagar, [for short “the Tribunal”], in TA No.
4652 of 2022, titled “Manzoor Ahmad Dar and others vs.
Union Territory of J&K and others“, whereby the
MIR ARIF MANZOOR WP(C) No. 1741/2022
I attest to the accuracy and
Page No. 3
authenticity of this document13.05.25
Tribunal has dismissed the TA filed by the petitioners beingdevoid of merit.
2. Before we advert to the grounds of challenge urged by
Mr. Jahangir Ahmad Ganaie, learned senior counsel
appearing for the petitioners, we deem it appropriate to
briefly trace out the factual antecedents leading to the filing
of this petition.
3. The Respondent-Board, vide its advertisement
notification No. 06 of 2017, invited applications from eligible
candidates for participating in the selection process for
various district cadre posts of teachers. The petitioners No.
1 and 2 responded to the said notification and submitted
their application for the post of teachers borne on district
cadre, Pulwama, in the General Category and RBA Category,
respectively. The petitioner No. 3, however, applied in the
district Cadre, Anantnag, in the RBA Category. On
conclusion of the selection process, the Respondent-Board
notified a provisional select list on 25th February, 2019, in
which the recommendations of some of the candidates were
withheld pending clarification regarding their
dual/overlapping qualifications. As is claimed by the
petitioners, they were figuring in the waiting list.
4. The petitioner No. 1 figured at Serial Number 11 in the
waiting list under Open Merit Category for District Pulwama;
MIR ARIF MANZOOR WP(C) No. 1741/2022
I attest to the accuracy and
Page No. 4
authenticity of this document13.05.25
the petitioner No. 2 figured at Serial Number 11 in thewaiting list under RBA Category for District Pulwama; and
the name of the petitioner No. 3 figured at Serial Number 3
under RBA Category for District Anantnag.
5. The petitioners, feeling aggrieved of the consideration of
the two degree courses of some of the selected candidates
pursued simultaneously, filed their objections to the
provisional selection list. Taking note of the objections raised
by the petitioners and a few other candidates, the
Respondent No. 1 vide Government Order No. 671-GAD of
2019, dated 13th June 2019, constituted a Committee to go
into the issue of dual/overlapping degrees acquired by some
of the selected candidates. Pursuant to the deliberations
held, the Committee submitted its report to the Government.
While the recommendations of the Committee were yet to be
made public, the Respondent No. 5 vide its Order No. 03-
DSEK of 2020, dated 7th January, 2020, accorded sanction
for appointment of the candidates whose recommendations
were withheld by the Respondent-Board on account of
dual/overlapping degrees. The Order of the Respondent No.5
aforesaid was called in question by the petitioners before
this Court in WP(C) No. 275/2020.
6. That while the aforesaid writ petition was pending
consideration, the Respondent-Board accepted the
recommendations made by the Committee and issued an
MIR ARIF MANZOOR WP(C) No. 1741/2022
I attest to the accuracy and
Page No. 5
authenticity of this document
13.05.25
Order bearing No. 61-SSB of 2020, dated 5th February,
2020, and cleared the appointments of some of the
candidates whose selection was earlier withheld. It is this
Order of the Respondent-Board, which was assailed by the
petitioners in TA No. 4652/2020. The impugned Order was
assailed by the Petitioners on the following grounds:-
(a) That pursuing of two degree courses
simultaneously was not permissible, as
stood clarified by the University Grants
Commission (UGC), by way of a public notice
issued on 15th January, 2016. The
universities, including the University of
Kashmir, stood directed by the University
Grants Commission (UGC) to conduct their
programs strictly in accordance with First
Degree and Master Degree Regulations,
2003.
(b) That the University of Kashmir had, by
virtue of Notification No. F(Amend-Statutes-
Gen)/Acad/KU/08 dated 16th September,
2008, permitted pursuing dual courses, one
by a regular mode and another through
distance mode. The aforesaid scheme
promulgated by the University of Kashmir
was suspended with immediate effect by
MIR ARIF MANZOOR WP(C) No. 1741/2022
I attest to the accuracy and
Page No. 6
authenticity of this document13.05.25
Notification No. F-(Amend-Statutes-Gen)Acad/KU/11, dated 1st March, 2011. The
notification, however, allowed the students
already registered for dual courses on 1st
March, 2011, to complete the courses. Later
on, by a subsequent notification dated 15th
March, 2012, the suspended scheme was
withdrawn with effect from the date of its
suspension.
(c) That any qualification acquired by a
candidate in violation of the statutes is
nullity in the eye of law and cannot be made
use of for seeking employment.
(d) That the decision of the committee that
candidates who have pursued two degrees
simultaneously shall be declared not to have
overlapping degrees, if the admission to
second course is taken after completing
minimum residential period of 1st course (21
months for the course consisting of 24
months and 09 months for the course
consisting of 12 months), is not supported
by any statute of the university, in
particular, Rule 5.7of the university statutes.
MIR ARIF MANZOOR WP(C) No. 1741/2022 I attest to the accuracy and Page No. 7 authenticity of this document 13.05.25 (e) That the decision of the Board to
consider one of the two overlapping degrees
in which a candidate has secured more
marks was irrational and arbitrary.
7. The OA was contested by the respondents. In the reply
affidavit filed by the Respondent-Board and the Director,
School Education, Kashmir, the impugned decision made by
the Board and implemented by the Director, School
Education, Kashmir, was justified on the ground that the
grievance raised by the petitioners was taken seriously and
got examined by the Committee of Experts. It was pleaded
by the Respondent-Board that impugned order was passed
on the basis of recommendations made by the Committee of
Experts. In a nutshell, the Respondent-Board sought to
justify its impugned decision on the ground that it was
based on the advice and the recommendations made by the
experts and, therefore, was immune from challenge in the
court of law.
8. The University of Kashmir also filed its reply affidavit
and submitted that it had permitted the pursuing of two
courses simultaneously, one as regular candidate and the
other through distance mode, for the period from
September, 2008 to March, 2011. Private Respondents also
filed their written submissions and contested the claim of
the petitioners.
MIR ARIF MANZOOR WP(C) No. 1741/2022
I attest to the accuracy and
Page No. 8
authenticity of this document
13.05.25
9. The Tribunal, having regard to the rival contentions
and the written submissions made by some of the parties,
came to the conclusion that the decision of the Respondent-
Board impugned in the writ petition was based on the advice
and recommendations of an expert committee and was,
therefore, not amenable to challenge under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India. Relying upon a couple of judgments of
the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the Tribunal held that it was
not within its domain to sit in judgment over the decision of
the experts. On this solitary ground, the Tribunal dismissed
the OA being devoid of merit, vide its order and judgment
impugned in this petition.
10. Before us also, the parties stuck to their rival stand
which they had taken before the Tribunal.
11. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the
material on record, including the judgment impugned
passed by the Tribunal. At the outset, it would be
appropriate to take note of the fact that the petitioners No. 1
and 2 are the candidates who had applied for the post of
Teachers borne in District Cadre, Pulwama. The petitioner
No. 1 figured at serial number 11 of the waiting list of
General Category candidates, whereas petitioner No. 2
figured at serial number 11 of the waiting list of RBA
category candidates of District Pulwama. The grievance of
the petitioners, if any, could only be in respect of the
MIR ARIF MANZOOR WP(C) No. 1741/2022
I attest to the accuracy and
Page No. 9
authenticity of this document
13.05.25
candidates selected in the District Cadre, Pulwama.
Simultaneously, petitioner No. 3 was an RBA candidate for
the post of Teacher in District Cadre, Anantnag, and
therefore, her grievance, too, could be restricted to the
candidates selected in the RBA category in District Cadre,
Anantnag. The Respondents No. 19 to 30 are the candidates
selected in the districts other than Pulwama and Anantnag,
and, therefore, are not necessary parties in this petition.
Their names are, therefore, struck off from the array of the
respondents.
12. The petitioner No. 1 was admittedly figuring at Serial
No. 11 of the waiting list of Open Merit Category in the
District Cadre, Pulwama. The petitioner would have chances
of selection only if 11 candidates finally selected in the
General Category in District, Pulwama, are either ousted or
have failed to join, which is a remote possibility. Similar is
the position with respect to petitioner No. 2. The petitioner
No. 3 also figured at Serial No. 3 in the waiting list of RBA
Category in District, Anantnag, and therefore, would have
chances of coming in the selection list only if the three
candidates from District, Anantnag, get out of the select list
of RBA Category candidates after their overlapping degrees
are ignored. This may be a possibility, but not a guarantee of
a selection of petitioner No. 3.
MIR ARIF MANZOOR WP(C) No. 1741/2022
I attest to the accuracy and
Page No. 10
authenticity of this document
13.05.25
13. With regard to Respondents 11 and 16, it was fairly
conceded by Mr. Jahangir Iqbal Ganaie, learned senior
counsel, that even if this petition is accepted and their
overlapping degrees are ignored, the aforesaid candidates
will still make it to the selection. The petitioners, therefore,
do not claim any relief against Respondents 11 and 16. It is
thus clear that the grievance of the petitioners as projected
in this petition survives only against some of the private
Respondents, i.e., Respondents No. 8-10, 12-15, 17, 18 and
31.
14. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the
matter and find that during the finalization of the selection
process for the teachers in different districts of the Kashmir
Division, initiated vide Advertisement Notification No. 06 of
2017, an issue of dual/overlapping degrees cropped up
before the Respondent-Board. The issue arose due to the
objections raised by some of the candidates who were
figuring in the waiting list and were aggrieved by the
inclusion of the candidates possessing dual/overlapping
degrees in the provisional selection list.
15. Having found the issue ticklish and requiring
examination by the experts, the matter was taken up by the
Respondent-Board with the Government. Taking cognizance
of the issue, the Government, vide Order No. 671-GAD of
2019 dated 13th June, 2019, constituted two committees,
MIR ARIF MANZOOR WP(C) No. 1741/2022
I attest to the accuracy and
Page No. 11
authenticity of this document
13.05.25
one each for Kashmir and Jammu Divisions. The Committee
for the Kashmir Division consisted of Secretary to the
Government, Department of Higher Education as Chairman,
Registrar University of Kashmir, Controller of Examination,
University of Kashmir, and a member of Jammu and
Kashmir Service Selection Board, as members.
16. The committee deliberated on the issue and came to
the conclusion that there were broadly four categories of the
candidates with dual/overlapping degrees:-
(i) Candidates with non-overlapping periods.
(ii) Candidates with 1-3 months of
overlapping periods.
(iii) Candidates with clear overlapping
periods.
(iv) Candidates who were yet to furnish the
actual admission date to the overlapping
degrees.
17. The Committee after threadbare discussion arrived at
the following decisions: –
(i) 106 cases have been found to have the
residential period of the overlapping degrees
falling in two separate academic sessions.
(ii) 35 candidates have been found to have
overlapping period of concurrent degrees but
MIR ARIF MANZOOR WP(C) No. 1741/2022
I attest to the accuracy and
Page No. 12
authenticity of this document
13.05.25
exempted in light of amended statutes of
University of Kashmir from September 2008
to March 2011 vide No. F(Amend-Statues-
Gen) Acad/KU/08 dated September, 16,
2008 and No. (Amend-Statues-Gen)
Accd/KU/11 dated March, 01, 2011.
(iii) 39 candidates whose dual degrees have 1-3
months overlapping period, Members from
University relaxed such overlapping on case-
to-case basis, taking into consideration the
admission of students and appearance in
examination as such they may be further
scrutinized in consultation with the
University of Kashmir.
(iv) 72 number of candidates have been found as
having concurrent/dual degrees with clear
overlapping period. In respect of such
candidates, the Committee was of the
opinion that JKSSB may revisit their
selection on the basis of only one of the
degrees that secures more points.
(v) 58 candidates are pending as they have not
yet furnished the actual date of admission to
overlapping degrees.
18. On the basis of the aforesaid decisions of the
Committee and the recommendations made, the
MIR ARIF MANZOOR WP(C) No. 1741/2022
I attest to the accuracy and
Page No. 13
authenticity of this document
13.05.25
Respondent-Board vide impugned order, released the
withheld recommendations of the candidates figuring in
Annexure-C of the report of Committee, after deducting the
points granted for the overlapping degree.
19. It is true that the UGC regulations, in particular, the
First Degree and Master Degree Regulations, 2003, [“the
regulations”] do not contain any specific provision restricting
the candidates to pursue only one degree course at a time,
though there is a requirement of minimum attendance for
the candidates pursuing their degree courses on regular
basis. We could not find anything in the Regulations of 2003
which puts an embargo on the right of the candidate to
pursue the two-degree courses simultaneously, more
particularly, when one of the course is through distance
mode. It is because of this ambiguity, the UGC itself was in
quandary and completely baffled with the problem for grant
of dual degrees pursued by candidates simultaneously.
20. In the year 2012, the UGC constituted an expert
committee to look into the issue. The UGC, after soliciting
the views from different Universities, made a positive
recommendation for allowing simultaneous degree
programmes. It seems that instead of taking its decision to
the logical end and seeking the approval from the Central
Government, the UGC once again dealt with the issue and
solicited views from various statutory councils. The issue
MIR ARIF MANZOOR WP(C) No. 1741/2022
I attest to the accuracy and
Page No. 14
authenticity of this document
13.05.25
was taken up for discussion by the Full Commission of UGC
in the year 2016, in which it was decided not to allow the
students to pursue a double degree course simultaneously
in the same academic year. The decision was taken to the
Ministry of Human Resources Department, Government of
India, for its approval. The Ministry was not in favour of
approving the decision. This constrained the University
Grants Commission (UGC) to again place the issue before
another expert committee headed by Shri Bhushan
Patwardhan, Vice-Chairman of UGC. The expert committee,
after having considered the issue, forwarded its
recommendation on 17th June, 2019, favouring the
simultaneous degree. The recommendations of the
committee headed by Shri Bhushan Patwardhan were
approved by the Full Commission of UGC in its 546th
meeting, held on 14th May, 2020. The matter has now been
referred to the Ministry of Human Resources Department,
the Government of India, and is pending consideration. Till
the decision is approved by the Government of India, no
formal notification can be issued by the UGC.
21. It is true that in the year 2016, when the full
commission of the University Grants Commission (UGC)
took a policy decision not to allow students to pursue two-
degree courses simultaneously, a public notice was issued
by the UGC on 15th January, 2016, clarifying that it did not
MIR ARIF MANZOOR WP(C) No. 1741/2022
I attest to the accuracy and
Page No. 15
authenticity of this document
13.05.25
endorse the idea of students pursuing two degrees at the
same time. In terms of the aforesaid public notice, all the
Universities were directed to conduct their programmes in
accordance with the Regulations of 2003.
22. However, as previously noted, the 2003 Regulations
neither expressly permit nor prohibit the pursuing of two-
degree courses simultaneously. The Regulations are, as a
matter of fact, silent on the issue. The UGC was yet to take a
clear decision on the issue. Earlier it did not favour the
grant of dual degrees pursued simultaneously, but the said
proposal did not receive the concurrence of the Central
Government. The matter was subsequently reviewed, and in
the year 2019, the UGC took a decision and decided to allow
the pursuing of two-degree courses simultaneously and
recommended this to the Government. A final decision from
the Government was awaited. This was the position during
the selection process in question.
23. However, after the promulgation of National Education
Policy (NEP, 2020, which, inter alia, emphasizes the need to
facilitate multiple pathways to learning involving both formal
and non-formal modes of education, the University Grants
Commission examined the issue of allowing the students to
pursue two academic programmes simultaneously. Pursuant
to a decision taken in tune with the National Education
Policy, 2020, the University Grants Commission issued
MIR ARIF MANZOOR WP(C) No. 1741/2022
I attest to the accuracy and
Page No. 16
authenticity of this document
13.05.25
guidelines for pursuing two academic programmes
simultaneously in April 2022. With the issuance of the
guidelines with effect from April 2022, it is now permissible
for a student to pursue even two full time academic
programmes in physical mode, provided that in such cases,
class timings of one programme do not overlap with the
class timings of the other programme. The students,
however, can pursue two academic programmes one in full
time physical mode and another in open and distance
learning(ODL)/online mode, or up to two ODL/online
programmes simultaneously etc. etc. The guidelines,
however, shall be applicable to students pursuing academic
programmes other than PhD programmes.
24. In these circumstances, we cannot hold with certainty
that the 2003 Regulations as were in vogue anyway
prohibited the pursuing of two degree courses
simultaneously. There was, however, a requirement of
minimum attendance in a regular course which would make
it abundantly clear that a student pursuing two degree
courses as a regular candidate shall not be able to register
the minimum 75% attendance as is required by the statutes.
Therefore, practically speaking, a candidate cannot pursue
two degree courses simultaneously on a regular basis.
However, the situation would be different if one of the
degrees is pursued through distance mode.
MIR ARIF MANZOOR WP(C) No. 1741/2022
I attest to the accuracy and
Page No. 17
authenticity of this document
13.05.25
24. Furthermore, there is no express prohibition in this
regard in the University Statutes of the University of
Kashmir regarding this matter. Rule 5.7 of the University
Statutes only provides that no candidate shall be admitted
to more than one course at a time within the University
department or any of its constituent or affiliated colleges or
institutions. There is, however, an exception to this general
rule. It provides that whenever a student having sought
admission to a particular course either in the University or
any of its constituent or affiliated colleges or institutions as
a regular student and having completed a minimum period
of attendance and laboratory work, where applicable, and in
the meanwhile he gets admission to a different course, such
candidate shall not be debarred from appearing in the
examination of the course indicated above etc. etc.
25. Thus, Rule 5.7 of the university statute only prohibits
pursuing of two-degree courses in the University
departments or any of its constituent or affiliated colleges or
institutions. The rule admittedly speaks about the regular
courses sought to be pursued by a candidate simultaneously
from the Kashmir University only. Rule 5.7, therefore,
cannot be said to have put a prohibition with regard to
pursuing a degree course through distance mode
simultaneously with another course through regular mode.
It is also relevant to note that the University of Kashmir,
MIR ARIF MANZOOR WP(C) No. 1741/2022
I attest to the accuracy and
Page No. 18
authenticity of this document
13.05.25
vide its notification dated 16th September, 2008, added a
proviso to Rule 5.7 allowing students pursuing a degree
through distance mode to simultaneously seek admission to
a regular programme and vice versa. This proviso was later
withdrawn with effect from 1st March 2011 by a notification
issued by the University dated 15th March, 2012. The
notification dated 16th September 2008, as is apparent from
its reading along with Rule 5.7, is more a clarificatory than
an exception to the general provisions of Clause 5.7. Its
withdrawal later on, in our opinion, would not make much
difference.
26. Viewed from any angle, we are convinced that, in the
absence of any express prohibition either in the UGC
Regulations of 2003 or in the Statutes of the University as
were then applicable, it cannot be held that a candidate was
not permitted to pursue two degree courses simultaneously,
one through regular mode and another through distance
mode. It is also pertinent to note that neither the applicable
recruitment rules nor the selection criteria framed by the
Respondent-Board provide for the exclusion of such degrees,
except, if these are not relevant or have been obtained in
violation of some law.
27. The Respondent-Board and for that matter, the
appointing authority, in the facts and circumstances of the
case, may not be in a position to ignore the degrees of the
MIR ARIF MANZOOR WP(C) No. 1741/2022
I attest to the accuracy and
Page No. 19
authenticity of this document
13.05.25
candidates obtained from recognized universities unless it is
apparent on the face of the record that such degrees are in
violation of the UGC Regulations or the University Statutes.
The Committee of Experts constituted by the Government
has thoroughly examined the issue and made its
recommendations which we cannot revise, modify or
improve in the exercise of our jurisdiction under Article 226
of the Constitution of India. While we may agree with the
learned senior counsel for the petitioners that the
Committee, on the basis of the material before it, could have
taken a better decision, however, that cannot be a ground to
interfere with the well thought-after decision taken by the
committee.
28. Viewed thus, we find no merit in this writ petition, and
the same is, accordingly, dismissed.
(MOHD YOUSUF WANI) (SANJEEV KUMAR)
JUDGE JUDGE
Srinagar,
09.05.2025
"Mir Arif"
Whether the Judgment is reportable? Yes
Whether the Judgment is speaking? Yes
MIR ARIF MANZOOR WP(C) No. 1741/2022
I attest to the accuracy and
Page No. 20
authenticity of this document
13.05.25
[ad_1]
Source link