The petitioner appeared as a private candidate in the B.A. Part-I Examinations conducted by the Chaudhary Charan Singh University, Meerut in 2010. The petitioner has cleared his examinations but he is not being given his results. The petitioner contacted the University and also filed an application for the redressal of his grievances. Inspite of repeated efforts, no further action was taken. On the contrary, the petitioner was informed that he cannot be permitted to raise such a claim as his very admission in B.A. Part-I was on the basis of "Adhikari Pariksha" Examination conducted by the Gurukul Vishwavidyalaya Vrindaban Mathura which is not recognised. According to the University the said examination is from a University which has been classified as a fake University by the University Grants Commission.
The prayer of the petitioner is for declaration of his results and for a further direction to permit him to appear in the B.A. Part-II Examinations to be conducted by the University. Sri R.K. Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner relies on the judgment of this Court in Writ Petition No. 9676 of 2008 (Ravi Dutta Sharma Vs. The Chaudhary Charan Singh University Meerut & others) decided on 4.2.2009 to contend that any such declaration or classification by the University Grants Commission is of no avail to the Meerut University, inasmuch as, this court has already declared that such a declaration is beyond the jurisdiction of the University Grants Commission. It is further submitted by Sri Gupta relying on the Letter dated 25th August, 2008 issued by the Board of High School and Intermediate Examinations, Uttar Pradesh to the effect that the "Adhikari Pariksha" passed by the petitioner is equivalent to Intermediate (Class XII) Exams conducted by the Board upto the year 2008 whereas the petitioner has passed the said examination in the year 2004 and therefore the stand taken by the University is erroneous.
Sri Anurag Khanna learned counsel for the University submits that the judgment of the learned Single Judge in the case of Ravi Datt Sharma (supra) is already under appeal before the Division Bench and apart from this the petitioner cannot claim equivalence, inasmuch as, the University where the petitioner has sought admission has not granted any equivalence to the said "Adhikari Pariksha" Examinations as per its Resolution dated 18.11.2003. The Resolution No. 4 of the Equivalence Committee of the Meerut University as relied upon by Sri Khanna, learned counsel is quoted hereinbelow:
"CHAUDHARY CHARAN SINGH UNIVERSITY, MEERUT Proceedings of the Meeting of the Equivalence Committee held on 18.11.2003 at 11-00 A.M. in the Vice Chancellor's Chamber, Chaudhary Charan Singh University, Meerut.
...........................................................................
P R E S E N T:-
1.Dr. Ram Pal Singh, Vice Chancellor (In the Chair)
2.Dr. S.P. Singh
3.Dr. N.K. Taneja
4.Dr. (Smt.) Chitra Singh
5.Dr. Govind Prakash
6.Sri Raj Kumar, Registrar (Secretary) Resolution No. 4: The committee considered the request of the Registrar, Gurukul Vishwavidyalaya, Vrindaban for recognising their various degrees or examinations as equivalent to the corresponding Examination of this University. The committee also considered the letter of Sri Tribhuvan Nath Mathur, Deputy Secretary, Govt. of U.P. No. 4862 & nks&ch0&77&1958 dated August 8, 1958 and letter No. F-461/630-SU dated 23-10-1978 of Sri P.N. Dhir, Deputy Secretary, Education Govt. of India, Ministry of Education, New Delhi-2 and allowed to recognise as follows:-
S.N. Details of Course Equivalent Exam.
1. Acharya ¼vkpk;Z½ M.A.
2. Shiromani ¼f'kjkse.kh½ B.A.
3. Pandit ¼iafMr½ XII (Senior Secondary Exam.)"
According to the said Resolution only three courses run by the Gurukul Vishwavidyalaya have been declared to be equivalent and Pandit Examination has been declared to be equivalent to Class XII. No equivalence has been granted to Adhikari Pariksha.
Sri Khanna further submits that the matter of equivalence is purely academic and is a policy decision taken by the University with which the Court cannot interfere in view of the law laid down in the case of Guru Nanak Dev University Vs. Sanjay Kumar Katwal and another, reported in (2009)1 SCC 610 Paras 15 and 16.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties, it is evident that the learned single Judge in view of the decision of Ravi Dutta Sharma (supra) held that the declaration of the University Grants Commission was beyond its jurisdiction and the said matter is still engaging the attention of the court before the Division Bench. Even though submissions have been raised by Sri Khanna to contend that the said decision does not lay down law correctly, yet without going into the merits of the said claim, as the matter is pending before the Division Bench, the stand taken by the University in relation to equivalence has to be considered. The said issue relating to equivalence has not been dealt with by the learned single Judge in the decision in the case of Ravi Dutta Sharma (supra).
The University being an autonomous institution and established under the State Universities Act, 1973 is governed by its own statues and ordinances. The University in exercise of its powers conferred on it has constituted the Equivalence Committee and the said Committee has taken a conscious decision on 18.11.2003 to grant recognition to only three courses of the Gurukul Vishwavidyalaya. The same does not include "Adhikari Pariksha" as also an equivalent examination. In such a situation and in view of the decision relied upon by the learned counsel for the respondent in the case of Guru Nanak Dev University (supra) this court cannot enter into the merits or otherwise of the equivalence granted by the University. Accordingly, the plea raised by the petitioner cannot be accepted.
So far as the clarification issued by the Board is concerned, the same may be relevant for the purpose of the U.P. Board of Intermediate and High School Examinations or for any purposes for which the State Government may have issued directions but the same being a clarification by the U.P. Board is not binding on the University. The U.P. Board does not have any control over the University. The University as already indicated above, being an independent autonomous institution and governed by different provisions, is not bound to treat the equivalence as indicated by the U.P. Board.
Accordingly, there is no merit in the petition, it is hereby dismissed.
Dt. 17.2.2011 Sahu