LexaceLexace Ask the AI ›
⚖️ Ask the AI about your situation:🚗 Car Accident💼 Work / Job🏠 Housing / Eviction👪 Family / Divorce📋 Contract Dispute💰 Money Owed

UNIVERSITY GRANTS COMMISSION ETC. versus SADHANA CHAUDHARY AND ORS.

Citation: [1996] SUPP. 6 S.C.R. 392 · Decided: 17-09-1996 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S.C. AGRAWAL · Disposal: Case Partly allowed

cites 2 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
UNIVERSITY GRANTS COMMISSION ETC. 
v. 
SADHANA CHAUDHARY AND ORS. 
SEPTEMBER 17, 1996 
B 
[S.C. AGRAWAL AND G.T. NANAVATI, JJ.] 
University Grants Commission Act, 1956. 
University Grants Commission (Qualifications Required of a Person to 
C be Appointed to the Teaching Staff of a University and Institutions Affiliated 
to it) Regulations 1991. 
Appointment of Lecturers-Exemptio11 granted to various categories of 
candidates from appea1ing in the Nation vide eligi.bility test by circulars dated 
Feb. 10, 1993, June 15, 1993 and notification dated June 21, 95 issued by 
D UGC-Validity of. 
Constitlltion of lndi~Artic/e 14-Right to equality-Cut off dates as 
prescribed by circular:. dated Feb 10, 93 June 15, 1993 and notification dated 
June 21, 1995 issued by UGC granting exemptio11 to various categories of 
E 
candidates from appearing in the eligi.bility test for appointment to the post of 
lecturer:,~Held, not violative of liglit to equality as such. 
F 
UGC framed University Grants Commission (Qualification re-
quired of a person to be appointed to the teaching staff of a university 
and institutions affiliated to it) Regulations 1982 in exercise of powers 
conferred by S. 26(1)(e) of the Act laying down the minimum qualifica-
tions for the purpose of appointment as university lecturer and college 
lecturer. 
On recommendations of Mehrotra committee and the Vice Chan-
G cellors Conference, UGC framed (Qualification required of a person to 
be appointed to the teaching staff of a university and Institutions 
affiliated to it) Regulations. The 1991 regulations laid down that for the 
purpose of appointment to the post of lecturers in University & colleges 
a candidate should have good academic record with at least 55% marks 
H or an equivalent grade at master's level in the relevant subject from an 
392 
U.G.C. v. S. CHAUDHARY 
393 
IDdian University or an equivalent degree from a foreign University. A 
Candidates besides fulfilling the above qualifications should have cleared 
the eligibility test for lecturers conducted by UGC, CSIR or similar test 
accredited by the UGC. The rational of the eligibility test prescribed by 
1991 Regulations was upheld by this Court in University of Delhi v. Raj 
Singh and Ors., [1994] Supp. 3 SCC 516. 
B 
UGC issued circulars on 15.2.93 and June 15, 1993 by which 
exemption was granted to 4 categories of candidates from appearing in 
the eligibility· test viz. • candidates who have passed UGC/CSIR J.R.F. 
examination, candidates who have already been awarded Ph. D. Degree, C 
candidates who have already been awarded M.Phil degree upto 31st, 
December 1992, and those who will submit their Ph.D. thesis upto 31st 
December 1993. The 1991 Regulations were further amended on 21.6.95 
stipulating that candidates who have submitted thesis or passed M.Phil. 
examination by 31st December 1993 are exempted from the eligibility test 
for lecturer conducted by UGC, CSIR or similar test accredited by the 
UGC. 
Haryana Public Service Commission issued advertisement on Jan. 
23, 1995 inviting applications for 200 tP.mporary posts of lecturers 
(College Cadre) in Haryana Educational Services (Group B) prescribing 
that along with the essential qualifications the candidates should have 
cleared the eligibility test for leCtureship conducted by UGC, CSIR or 
similar test accredited by the UGC. However the said condition was not 
applicable to the candidates who had been awarded M.Phil degree upto 
31st December 1992 and who have .submitted Ph.D. thesis upto December 
31, 1993. 
D 
E 
F 
The candidates who were awarded M.Phil degree in December 1993 
approached High Court by way of a writ petition assailing the cut off 
dates fixed by the advertisement dated January 23, 1995. Allowing the G 
writ petition High Court held that the cut off dates fixed by the 
advertisement were unjust and not based on any rationale in as much 
as it amounts to creation of an artificial class amongst the eligible 
candidates though similarly situated, as the cut off dates fixed are far 
earlier to the date of the advertisement dated January 23, 1995. The High H 
394 
SU~REME COURT REPORTS (1996] SUPP. 6 s.c.~. 
A 
Court directed the Haryana Public Service Commission to issue a 
corrigendum extending the dates as prescribed in advertisement dated 
January 23, 1995 upto December 31, 1994. It further directed HPSC to 
ensure in future that as and when any such advertisement is issued that 
should bear in mind that the 

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.