CASE SUMMARY
In Suganya Jeba Sarojini Vs The Tamil Nadu Dr. Ambedkar Law University & Anr., [W.P. No. 12063/2021], the Division Bench of the Hon’ble Madras High Court consisting of the Chief Justice and Justice D. Bharatha Chakravarthy read down Clause 3.1 of the Tamil Nadu Dr. Ambedkar Law University P.hD Regulations, 2020 without the words ‘Two Years’, in so far as it prescribed possession of Two Years LLM as eligibility for admission into the University’s P.hD program.
BRIEF FACTS:
· The Petitioner graduated from the Dr. Ambedkar Government Law College, Chennai affiliated to the 1st Respondent, i.e., the Tamil Nadu Dr. Ambedkar Law University in May, 2015 and thereafter completed LLM (Human Rights), which is a one-year LL.M, from the Amity Institute of Advanced Legal Studies, Amity University at Noida in May 2016. Subsequently, she was teaching students at the Respondent University as an Assistant Professor on Contract Basis from 01.07.2019.
· At this juncture, the 1st Respondent framed ‘the Tamil Nadu Dr. Ambedkar Law University Ph.D Regulations, 2020’ laying down, among other things, eligibility for admission to Ph.D Degree in law. According to Regulation 3.1 of the Regulations, only those possessing a ‘Two Years LL.M’ are eligible for admission to Ph.D at the 1st Respondent University.
· The Petitioner was ineligible to apply for the Ph.D Research Programme in Law vide P.hD notification dated 10.05.2021 issued by the 1st Respondent in view of the Regulation 3.1 of the TNDALU P.hD Regulations, 2020. Aggrieved, the writ petition was filed challenging the vires of the above regulation on several grounds.
SUBMISSIONS OF THE PETITIONER:
· The one-year LLM Degree program was introduced by the University Grants Commission, the 2nd Respondent herein vide ‘Guidelines for Introduction of one-year LLM Degree program, 2012’.
· The preamble of the above ‘Guidelines’ states that
“…a Round Table on Legal Education set up by the Ministry of Human Resources Development asked the UGC to examine the reform of the LL.M Degree programme and making it a one year course like in all developed countries. An Expert Committee appointed by the UGC in 2010 submitted a report proposing LL.M one year programme. These Guidelines are therefore being circulated so that universities fulfilling the conditions therein may prepare themselves to change over to the Revised One Year LL.M Degree course from academic 2013-2014”.
· Moreover, vide letter D. O. No. 5-1/99(CPP-II) dated 18.01.2013 written by the Education Officer of the University Grants Commission, the 2nd Respondent required all the Vice-Chancellors that:
“The Universities fulfilling the above guidelines may take appropriate action to switch over to one year LL.M programme without compromising on quality and standards.”
· Pursuant to the above UGC Guidelines of 2012, all the National Law Schools in India, several Central & State Universities and many other premier Law Schools like the Indian Law Institute at Delhi introduced One-year LLM Degree Course, by replacing the two-years LLM Degree Course upon achieving the higher standards prescribed in the UGC 2012 guidelines.
· Since LL.M is the same degree, there is no question of equivalence of one year LL.M with the two years LL.M.
· Moreover, vide the impugned regulation, the 1st Respondent has encroached upon the powers of the 2nd Respondent i.e, UGC by invalidating, in pith and substance a Master’s Degree introduced and approved by the latter.
The Bar Council Regulations relied on by the Respondent Univeristy never came into force and even if it did, it never invalidates a one Year LLM already obtained.
SUBMISSIONS OF THE RESPONDENT UNIVERSITY:
The University had submitted that a one year LLM was not equivalent to a Two Years LLM;
The University had the discretion to prescribe standards for admission to its P.hD course;
The 2012 UGC guidelines only enabled introduction of a one year LLM but does not mandate the course;
The one year LLM was intended to be temporarily introduced.
HELD:
The Writ Petition was allowed on the following terms:
Clause 3.1 of the Tamil Nadu Dr. Ambedkar Law University P.hD Regulations, 2020 was read down without the words ‘Two Years’;
the Respondent University is directed to admit the Petitioner in their P.hD course of she was found otherwise eligible.
REASONING:
No question of equivalence within the same degree;
UGC is the competent authority to validate the LLM degree in the absence of any Bar Council Regulations in the contrary;
Classification of a valid full time regular LLM is akin to 3 years LLB and 5 years LLB and therefore cannot be discriminated.
APPEARANCE:
For Petitioner: M. NIRMALKUMAR;
For Tamil Nadu Dr. Ambedkar Law University: Senior Counsel, Dr. Thiyagarajan for Mr. Nalla Thambi;
For the UGC: Mr. P.R. Gopinathan
Comments