UNIVERSITY GRANTS COMMISSION ETC.versusSADHANA CHAUDHARY AND ORS.

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.


          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
F   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 D
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        E
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        F
31, 1993.

      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 eligibility dates be not far off from the
B   date of advertisement.

          Bihar State University Service Commission on Nov. 22, 1993 issued
    advertisement inviting applications for appointment to the post of
    lecturers in various Universities of Bihar. However the .said advertise-
    ment did not prescribe that the candidates should have cleared the
C   national eligibility test conducted by UGC.

          Candidates from State of Bihar who had cleared the eligibility test
    as prescribed by UGC filed Writ Petition challenging the Advertisement
    issued by Bihar State University Commission on the ground that the
D   qualifications prescribed in the advertisement were not in consonance
    with the qualifications prescribed by UGC.

          High Court allowed the writ Petition and held that only the
    candidates who had passed national eligibility test in terms of the UGC
E   regulations could be considered by the Bi~ar State University Commis-
    sion.

          Bihar State University (Second amendment) Ordinance 1994 and
    Patna University (Third amendment) Ordinance, 1994 were promulgated
F   which laid down that a candidate who has submitted Ph.D. thesis by
    December 31, 1993 or has got a degree of M.Phil before December 31,
    1992 will be exempted from appearing in the eligibility test of lec-
    turers/Junior Research fellow conducted by UGC/CSIR.

         Consequently the Bihar State University Commission issued a
G corrigendum dated December 25, 1994 to the advertisement dated Nov.
  22, 1993 to this effect. The said ordinances as well as the circulars dated
  Feb. 10, 1993 and June l:i, 1993 issued by the UGC were challenged by
  way of Writ petition. The High Court held that UGC was within its
  jurisdiCtion in issuing guidelines for the appointment of lecturers in
H Universities & colleges & Chancellor was also within his Jurisdiction in
                          U.G.C.v.S.CHAUDHARY                                 395

promulgating the ordinance. Hence this appeal by Special Leave.                      A

      The questions before this Court were;-

      (i) whether the cut off dates fixed under the circular & notification
wer valid.
                                                                                     B
      (ii) whether the exemption from clearing eligibility test or equivalent
examination under the said circular and notification is valid.

      It was contended by UGC that the circulars were in the nature of
transitional provisions.
                                                                                     c
      Disposing of the appeals, this court

       HELD : 1.1. Exemption granted by the amendment introduced in the
1991 Regulations by circulars dated February 10, 1993, June 15, 1993 and
by notification dated June 21, 1995 is not violative of the right to equality D
guaranteed under article 14 of the Constitution as such candidates con-
stitute a distinct class who could be treated separately in so far as the
requirements of clearing the eligibility test is concerned. Such a classifica-
tion of candidates for the purpose of applicability of the requirement of
clearing the eligibility test has a rational basis which has a reasonable E
nexus with the·object sought to be achieved by the 1991 Regulations, i.e.
clearing of National Eligibility test for appointment to post of lecturers in
various universities so as to remove disparties in the standards of ex-
amination at the Masters level between different universities. [408-F-G]

      1.2. It is settled law that the choice of date as a basis for classification   F
cannot always be dubbed as arbitrary even if no particular reason is
forthcoming for the choice unless it is shown to be capricious or whimsical
in the circumstances. When it is seen that a line or a point there must be
and there is no mathematical or logical way of fixing it precisely, the
decision of the legislature or its delegate must be accepted unless it can           G
be said that it is very wide of the reasonable mark. [406-C-D]

      1.3. In the instant cases the cut off dates fixed cannot be held to be
carpicious or whimsical or wide of the reasonable mark. [406-C-D]

      Union of India & Anr. v. Mis. Paramesltwaran Match Works Ltd., H
    396                  SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1996) SUPP. 6 S.C.R.

A [1975) 2 SCR 573 and Dr. (Mrs. Sushma Shanna Etc. Etc. v. State of
    Rajasthan & Ors., [1985) 3 SCR 243, relied on.

          CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 12284 of
    1996 etc.

B        From the Judgment and Order dated the 21st March, 1995 of the.
    High Court of Punjab and Haryana in Civil Writ Petition No. 2252 of 1995.

         M.K. Banerjee, S.B. Sanyal, Gaurav Banerjee, Navin Prakash, A.K.
    Pandey, B.B. Singh, A.O. Sikri, Ashok K. Mahajan and R.S. Suri for the
C   appearing parties.

          The Judgment of the Court was delivered by

           S.C. AGARWAL, J. Special leave granted in both the special leave
    petitions.
D
        These appeals raise questions relating to grant of exemption from
  the provisions contained in the University Grants Commission (Qualifica-
  tions Required of a Person to be Appointed to the Teaching Staff of a
  University and Institutions Affiliated to it) Regulations, 1991 (hereinafter
E referred to as 'the 1991 Regulations') which require that for appointment
  on the post of lecturer in universities and colleges the candidate should
  have cleared the eligibility test for lecturers conducted by the University
  Grants Commission ( hereinafter referred to as 'the UGC'), Council of
  Scientific and Industrial Research (for short 'CSIR') or similar test ac-
  credited by the UGC.
F
          The UGC has been established under the University Grants Com-
    mission Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act) which was enacted
    by Padiament to make provisions for the co- ordination and determination
    of standards in Universities. One of the functions entrusted to the UGC
    under the Act is to recommend to any University the measures necessary
G   for the improvement of University education and advise the University
    upon the action to be taken for the purpose of implementing such recom-
    mendation (Section 12(d)). The UGC has been empowered to make
    regulations consistent with the Act and the rules made thereunder defining
    the qualifications that should ordinarily be required of any person to be
H   appointed to the teaching staff of the University, having regard to the
               U.G.C. v. S. CHAUDHARY [S.C.AGRAWAL,J.]                   397

branch of education in which he is expected to give instruction. [Section A
26(1)(e)]. In exercise of the powers conferred by Section 26(1)(e), the
UGC made the University Grants Commission (Qualifications Required of
a Person to be Appointed to the Teaching Staff of a University and
Institutions Affiliated to it Regulations, 1982 (hereinafter referred to as 'the
1982 Regulations') whereby qualifications were prescribed for appointment B
to a teaching post in the University or in any of the institutions including
constituent or affiliated colleges recognised under clause (f) of Section 2
of the Act or in an institution deemed to be a University under Section 3
of the Act. Under the 1982 Regulations the minimum qualifications
prescribed for appointment to the post of University lecturers were (i) a
Doctorate's Degree or Research work of equally high standard; and (ii) a C
good academic record with at least second class (C in the seven point
scale) Master's degree in a relevant subject from an Indian University or
an equivalent degree from a foreign University. For college lecturers the
minimum qualifications prescribed were (i) an M.Phil degree or a recog-
nised degree beyond the Master's level or published work indicating the D
capacity of a candidate for independent research work; and (ii) good
academic record with at least second class (C in the seven point scale)
Master's degree in a relevant subject from an Indian University or an
equivalent degree from a foreign university.

       In its report dated March 23, 1985, the National Commission on E
Teachers II, after observing that standards of performance varied from
university to university, expressed the view that it must be ensured that
every citizen aspiring to be a teacher at the tertiary level, i.e., a lecturer,
qualified in terms of a national yardstick. The Commission recommended
that the UGC should incorporate the passing of one of the national tests F
at least in grade B + on a seven point scale in its regulations laying down
the minimum qualifications of teachers and that this should come into force
within two years. Thereafter, in 1986, the UGC appointed a Committee
under the Chairmanship of Prof. R.C. Mehrotra (for short 'the Mehrotra
Committee') to examine the structure of emoluments and conditions of
service of University and college teachers and to make recommendations G
in this behalf having regard to the necessity of attracting and retaining
talented persons in the teaching profession and providing advancement and
opportunities to teachers of Universities and colleges. The Mehrotra Com-
mittee was of the view that, in order to ensure quality of new entrants to
the teaching profession, all aspirants for the post of lecturer in a University H
    398                  SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1996) SUPP. 6 S.C.R.

A or college should have passed a national qualifying examination since such
    a test would have the merit of removing disparities in standards of examina-
    tion at the Master's level between different Universities and, as a result, ·
    local influence would be minimised and the eligibility zone for recruitment
    would become wider. The Mehrotra Committee recommended the follow-
B   ing minimum qualifications for appointment to the post of Lecturer :
                                                                                     ,
            "(i) Qualifying at the National Test conducted for the purpose by
            the UGC or any other agency approved by the (JGC.

            (ii) Master's degree with at least fifty-five percent marks or its
            equivalent grade and good academic record.
c
                The minimum qualifications mentioned above should not be
            relaxed even for :::andidates possession M.Phil, Ph.D qualification
            at the time of recruitment."

D          After examining the various recommendations contained in the
    report of the Mehrotra Committee and the recommendations made by the
    U GC, the Government of India prepared a scheme for revision of pay
    scales of Teachers in the Universities and Colleges and other measures for
    maintenance of standards in higher education and, by letter dated June 17,
    1987, the Government of India forwarded the said scheme to the Education
E   Secretaries of all the State and Union Territories with a request to formu-
    late detailed proposals for the implementation of the scheme on the lines
    indicated in the said letter. The said scheme was revised by the Central
    Government in 1988. The original scheme as well as the revised scheme
    required that only those candidates who, besides fulfilling the minimum
F   academic qualifications prescribed for the post of Lecturer, have qualified
    in a comprehensive test, to be specially conducted for the purpose, will be
    eligible for appointment as Lecturers.

        In 1989 a conference of Vice-Chancellors was held under the
  auspices of the UGC and one of the major recommendations made in the
G said conference was :
            "The National level test to determine the eligibility for lecturers be
            conducted. When the State Government conducts such tests, while
            accrediting them caution be exercised."

H         Keeping in view the said recommendations the UGC made the 1991
              U.G.C. v. S. CHAUDHARY [S.C.AGRAWAL,J.J                  399

Regulations which were notified vide notification dated September 19, A
1991. The 1991 Regulations superseded the 1982 Regulations and
prescribed the following minimum qualifications for the post of lecturers
in universities and colleges :

        "Good academic record with at least 55% marks or an equivalent
        grade at Master's level in the relevant subject from an India         B
        University or an equivalent degree from a foreign University.

        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."                               C

     By Circular dated February 10, 1993 the UGC granted exemption
from appearing in the eligibility test to following categories :

        1.   All candidates who have passed UGC/CSIR J.R.F. Examina-
             tion.                                                            D
        2.   All candidates who have already been awarded Ph.D degree.

        3.   All candidates who have already been awarded M.Phil degree
             upto 31st March, 1991.
                                                                              E
        4.   All candidates who will submit their Ph.D thesis upto 31st
             December, 1993.

      By circular dated June 15, 1993 in respect of candidates falling in
category (3) exemption from appearing in the eligibility test was extended
to candidates who had been awarded M.Phil degree upto December 31,            F
1992. By a notification dated June 21, 1995 the 1991 Regulations have been
amended and the following proviso has been added below the requirement
regarding clearing the eligibility test for appointment on the post of Lec-
turer:
                                                                              G
           "Provided that candidates who have submitted Ph.D thesis or
        passed,the M.Phil examination by 31st December, 1993 are ex-
        empted from the eligibility test for lecturers conduct by UGC,
        CSIR or similar test accredited by the UGC."

     The requirement regarding clearing the eligibility test for appoint-     H
    400                  SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1996) SUPP. 6 S.C.R.

A ment on the post of Lecturer as prescribed by the UGC under the 1991
    Regulations came up for consideration before this Court in University of
    Delhi v. Raj Singh and Ors., (1994) Supp. 3 SCC 516. After taking note of
    the report of the National Commission on Teachers II, the Mehrotra
    Committee report and the recommendations of the Vice-Chancellors' con-
B   ference held in 1989, the Court has observed:

            "It is very important to note that a duty is cast upon the Commission
            {the UGC) to take 'all such steps as it may think fit for the
            determination and maintenance of standards of teaching'. These
            are very wide-ranging powers. Such powers, in our view, would
c           comprehend the power to require those who possess the educa-
            tional qualifications required for holding the post of lecturer in
            Universities and colleges to appear for a written test, the passing
            of which would establish that they possess the minimal proficiency
            for holding such post. The need for such test is demonstrated by
            the reports of the commissions and committees of educationists
D           referred to above which take note of the disparities in the standards
            of education in the various Universities in the country. It is patent
            that the holder of a postgraduate degree from one University is
            not necessarily of the same standard as the holder of the same
            postgraduate degree from another University. That is the rational
E           of the test prescribed by the said Regulations."

                                                                  (pp. 5321 533)

          We may now briefly refer to the facts of these two cases.

F   Civil Appeal No. of 1996 (@ S.L.P. (C) No. 16220/1995)

          On January 23, 1995, the Haryana Public Service Commission issued
  an advertisement inviting applications for 200 t~mporary posts of Lecturers
  {College cadre) in various subjects in Haryana Educational Service {Group
  'B). In the said advertisement it was prescribed that candidates besides
G fulfilling the essential qualifications mentioned therein in the respective
  subjects should have cleared the eligibility test for lectureship conducted
  by the UGC, CSIR or similar test accredited by the UGC. The said
  condition was, however, not applicable to candidates mentioned in clauses
  (a) to {d) 'Jf paragraph 5. Clause (b) covered those who had been awarded
H M.Phil degree upto December 31, 1992 and clause (c) covered candidates
                    U.G.C. v. S.CHAUDHARY(S.C.AGRAWAL,J.]                       401

     who had submitted their Ph.D thesis upto December 31, 1993.                       A

           Sadhana Chaudhary and Aarti Ahluwalia, respondents Nos. 1 and 2,
     had joined M. Phil course of Punjab University for the session 1991-92.
     Sadhana Chaudhary submitted her thesis on January 25, 1993, the viva voice
'.   test was held some time in November, 1993 and the M. Phil degree was
     awarded to her on December 14, 1993. Aarti Ahluwalia submitted her B
     thesis on October 7, 1992, the viva voice test was held in December, 1993
     and she was awarded M.Phil degree on December 14, 1993. Since they had
     been awarded the M.Phil degree after December 31, 1992, they were not
     given exemption from clearing the eligibility test as per the requirement of
     the advertisement. They approached the High Court of Punjab and C
     Haryana by filing a writ petition (Civil Writ Petition No. 2252 of 1995)
     wherein they assailed the cut off dated, i.e., December 31, 1992, as fixed
     in paragraph 5(b) of the advertisement regarding exemption given to .
     candidates who have been awarded M.Phil degrees from the eligibility .test.

                                                                                       D
            The grievance of both the writ petitioners was 11iat for the purpose
     of giving exemption from eligibility test for candidates who had obtained
     M.Phil degrees the cut off date, i.e., December 31, 1992, has been fixed
     arbitrarily and that there is no rational basis in confining the exemption to
     candidates who had been awarded M.Phil degrees upto December 31, 1992
     in an advertisement issued in January 1995 because as between Decembe.r           E
     31, 1992 to Decerber 1994 many candidates might have obtained M.Phil
     degrees.          ·

            The exemption for clearing the eligibility test under clauses (a) to (d)
      of paragraph 5 of the advertisement was based on the Circulars of the UGC        F
      dated February 10, 1993 and June 15, 1993 referred to earlier. It appears
     that the UGC did not appear in response to the notice issued by the High
      Court on the writ petition filed by respondents Nos. 1 and 2 and the State
      of Haryana and the Haryana Public Service Commission, who contested
      the said writ petition, could not offer any explanation for the said provision
     in the advertisement. In the absence of any explanation having been               G
     offered for fixing December 31, 1992 as the cut off date for grant of
     exemption to candidates having M.Phil degree, the High Court, by its
     judgment dated March 21, 1995, allowed the writ petition of respondents
     Nos. 1 and 2 on the view that cut off dates prescribed in paragraph 5(b)
     and (c) of the advertisement in respect of candidates who had acquired            H
    402                   SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1996] SUPP. 6 S.C.R.

A M.Phil degree or submitted the Ph.D thesis are totally unjust and based on
  no rationale inasmuch as it amounts to creation of an artificial class
  amongst the eligible candidates though similarly sit~ated, i.e., having ob-
  tained M.Phil degree after December 31, 1992., or having submitted Ph.D
  thesis after December 31, 1993 respectively and that cut off dates, i.e.,
B December 31, 1992 for M.Phil degree and December 31, 1993 in case of
  submission of Ph.D thesis, are far earlier to the date of the advertisement
  dated January 23, 1995. According to the High Court, it would not be
  necessary to appear in the eligibility test for the candidates who have
  applied or/are applying for the Lecturers' post pursuant to the advertise-
  ment dated January 23, 1995 if they have obtained M.Phil degrees or
C submitted Ph.D thesis before December 31, 1994, i.e., prior to the date of
  the publication of advertisement dated January 23, 1995. On that view the
  High Court directed the Haryana Public Service Commission and State of
  Haryana to issue a corrigendum extending the dates in paragraph 5(b) and
  (c) of the advertisement dated January 23, 1995 upto December 31, 1994
D and further directed that in future also they should ensure that as and when
  any such advertisement is issued, they will bear in mind that the eligibility
  dates be not far off from the date of advertisement.                             .....
    Civil Appeal No. of 1996 (@ S.L.P. (C) No. 27375/1995)
E
          On November 22, 1993, the Bihar State University Service Commis-
   sion issued an advertisement inviting application is for appointment on the
   post of Lecturers in various universities in Bihar. The said advertisement
   did not prescribe that the candidates should have cleared the national
F- eligibility test conducted by the UGC. Some of the ·candidates who had
   qualified in the national eligibility test filed a writ petition (C.WJ.C. No.
   321 of 1994) in the Patna High Court wherein it was alleged that the
   qualifications that were prescribed in the advertisement were not in con-
   sonance with the qualifications prescribed by the UGC whereunder it is
   necessary that the candidates should have passed the eligibility test. The
G said writ petition was allowed by the High Court by judgment dated March
   9, 1994 whereby it was held that the applications of only those candidates
   who had passed national eligibility examination in terms of the regulations
   framed by the UGC could be considered by the Bihar State University
   Service Commission. A Review Petition was filed against the said judgment
H by the Bihar State University Service Commission and by order dated April
               U.G.C. v. S.CHAUDHARY[S.C.AGRAWAL,J.]                    403

27, 1994 the High Court clarified that the Bihar State University Service A
Commission should consider the candidature of such persons who were
eligible to be considered in terms of regulations framed by the UGC.
Thereafter the Governor of Bihar promulgated Bihar State University
(Second Amendment) Ordinance, 1994 and Patna university (Third
Amendment) Ordinance, 1994 on December 8, 1994 where by provisions
                                                                           B
was made regarding relaxation of the minimum qualification for appoint-
ment on the post of Lecturer in university/constituent colleges and a
candidate who has got a degree of Ph.D in the concerned subject and/or
has submitted his thesis for Ph.D by December 31, 1993 and/or has got a
degree of M.Phil before December 31, 1992 has been made eligib!e for
appointment as Lecturer without having passed the Bihar Eligibility Test c
or the Eligibility Test of Lecturer/Junior Research Fellow (JRF) conducted
by the UGC/CSIR. Thereafter the Bihar State University Service Commis-
sion issued a Corrigendum dated December 25, 1994 in the advertisement
dated November 22, 1993 whereby it was indicated that all candidates who
have already done M.Phil upto December 31, 1992 or who have done or D
submitted the Ph.D thesis upto December 31, 1993 or have qualified the
National Eligibility Test (NET)/JRF Test of UGC/CSIR would be ex-
empted from appearing at the Bihar Eligibility Test to be conducted by
Bihar State University Service Commission.
                                                                               •
                                                                              E
      Thereupon the writ petition (C.W.J.C. No. 744 of 1995) which has
given rise. to this appeal was filed in the Patna High Court by the appellan~s
herein. In the said writ petition the validity of the provisions contained in
the aforementioned Ordinances dated December 8, 1994 promulgated by
the Governor of Bihar regarding relaxation of the minimum qualification
                                                                               F
for appointment on the post of lecturer as well as the Corrigendum dated
December 25, 1994 issued by the Bihar State University Service Commis-
sion and the Circulars dated February 10, 1993 and June 15, 1993 issued
by the UGC were challenged. The appellants sought_ a direction that the
post of Lecturers be filled by only those persons who have cleared the
National Eligibility Test or its equivalent examination. During the Penden- G
cy of the said'writ petition in the High Court, the Bihar State University
Service Commission conducted the Bihar Eligibility Test on June 18, 1995.
On June 21, 1995, the UGC issued a notification amending· the 1991
Regulations to which reference has already been made earlier. By the
impugned judgment dated June 27, 1995 the High Court has held that H
    404                   SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1996) SUPP. 6 S.C.R.

A UGC was within its jurisdiction in issuing guidelines for the appointment
    of Lecturers in the Universities and colleges in the State of Bihar and the
    Chancellor was also within his jurisdiction in promulgating the Ordinances
    in consonance thereto. Feeling aggrieved by the said judgment of the High
    Court the appellants have filed this appeal.
B       During the course of arguments it was pointed out that both the
  Ordinances referred to above which were promulgated by the Governor of
  Bihar on December 8, 1994 have since been replaced by enactments of the
  State Legislature, viz., Bihar Acts Nos. 12 and 13 of 1995. lt has also been
  pointed out that the Bihar Eligibility Test for Lecturership that was con-
C ducted by the Bihar State University Service Commission on June 18, 1995
  has been granted accreditation by the UGC on February 12, 1996 and
  future tests to be held in .the period 1995-97 have also been accredited by
  the UGC with certain recommendations.

D          Both these appeals raise questions regarding validity of the circulars
    of the UGC dated February 10, 1993 and June 15, 1993 as well as the
    notification dated June 21, 1995 amending the 1991 Regulations. In Civil
    Appeal arising out of Special Leave Petition (C) No. 16220 of 1995 the
    question is whether the cut off dates fixed under the said Circulars and
•   notification in respect of candidates who have obtained M.Phil degree or
E   have submitted their Ph.D thesis were valid. In Civil Appeal arising out of
    Special Leave Petition (C) No. 27375 of 1995 the question is whether the
    exemption from clearing the eligibility test or equivalent examination
    under the said Circulars and notification is valid. This appeal also involves
    the question regarding validity of the two Ordinances tha~ were promul-
F   gated by the Governor of Bihar on December 8, 1994 and the legislative
    enactment replacing the Ordinances.

         Shri Milon K. Banerjee, the learned senior counsel appearing for the
  UGC, has submitted that the Circulars dated February 10, 1993 and June
  15, 1993 were in the nature of transitional provisions which became neces-
G sary as a result of imposing the requirement regarding clearing the
  eligibility test by a candidate for appointment on the post of Lecturer under
  the 1991 Regulations. The learned counsel has pointed out that under the
  1982 Regulations, which were superseded by the 1991 Regulations, a
  person possessing Ph.D degree was eligible for appointment on the post of
H Lecturer in the University and a person possessing M.Phil degree was
               U.G.C. v. S. CHAUDHARY [S.C.AGRAWAL,J.)                   405

eligible for appointment on the post of Lecturer in the college. This           A
position was altered by the 1991 Regulations and candidates having good
academic record with it least 55% marks or an equivalent grade at Master's
degree level in the relevant subject became eligible for appointment on the
post of Lecturers in universities or colleges provided they had cleared the
eligibility test for Lecturers conducted by the UGC, CSIR or similar test       B
accredited by the l)GC. A Ph.Dor M.Phil degree is no longer an essential
qualification for such appointments. There were a number of persons who
had obtained Ph.D and M.Phil degrees or had joined the Ph.D or M.Phil
degree courses prior to the issuance of the 1991 Regulations in the light of
the minimum qualifications that were prescribed in the 1982 Regulations.
The Circulars dated February 10; 1993 and June 21, 1993 were issued to          C
mitigate the resultant hardship to such persons on account of the introduc-
tion of the requirement of clearing the eligibility test in the 1991 Regula-
tions. By Circular dated February 10, 1993 exemption from this
requirement was granted to candidates who had already been awarded the
Ph.D degree as well as to candidates who would submit their Ph.D thesis         D
upto December 31, 1993. As regards candidates having obtained M.Phil
degree, by Circular dated February 10, 1993, the exemption was initially
confined to those who had already been awarded M.Phil degree upto
March 31, 1991. Subsequently it was felt that there were candidates who
had joined the M.Phil course prior to issuance of the 1991 Regulations but
                                                                                E
had not obtained the M.Phil degree till then and, therefore, by Circular
dated June 15, 1993, the date of obtaining the M.Phil degree was extended
from march 31, 1991 to December 31, 1992 under the eXpectation that by
that date those persons would be able to complete the M.Phil course and
obtain M.Phil degree. Shri Banerjee has contended that both these Cir-
culars dated February 10, 1993 and June 21, 1993 have now ceased to have        F
any significance in view of the notification dated June 21, 1995 wereby the
1991 Regulations have been amended and it has been prescribed that
candidates who have submitted Ph.D. thesis or passed the M.Phil examina-
tion by December 31, 1993 are exempted-from eligibility test for Lecturers
conducted by UGC/CSIR or similar test accredited by the UGC. The                G
submission is that after the aforesaid amendment in the 1991 Regulations
the only question that is left for' consideration is whether the cut off date
(December 31, 1993) prescribed in the 1991 Regulations, as amended, can
be held to be arbitrary. Shri Banerjee has urged that having regard to the
time that is normally taken by a candidate who had registered for the Ph.D      H
    406                    SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1996] SUPP. 6 S.C.R.

A degree or had joined M.Phil course prior to the making of the 1991
    Regulations, the fixation of December 31, 1993 as the cut off date cannot
    be held to be arbitrary or unreasonable. Shri Banerjee, in this context, has
    placed reliance on the decision of this Court in Union of India & Anr. v.
    M/s. Parameshwaran Match Works Ltd., (1975] 2 SCR 573; and Dr. (Mrs.)
B   Sushma Shanna Etc. Etc. v. State of Rajasthan & Ors., (1985] 3 SCR 243.

           We find considerable force in the aforesaid submissions of Shri
     Banerjee. It is settled law that the choice of a date as a basis for classifica-
     tion cannot always be dubbed as arbitrary even if no particular reason is
    forth coming for the choice unless it is shown to be capricious or whimsical
C   in the circumstances. When it is seen that a line or a point there must be
    and there is no mathematical or logical way of fixing it precisely, the
     decision of t!ie legislature or its delegate must be accepted unless it can be
     said that it is very wide of the reasonable mark. (See : Union of India &
    Anr. v. M/s. Parameshwaran Match Works Ltd., (1975] 2 SCR 573, at p. 579;
D    and Dr. (Mrs.) Susluna Shanna Etc. Etc. v. State of Rajasthan & Ors., (1985]
    3 SCR 243, at p. 269. In the present case, the date, December 31, 1993, as
    fixed by notification dated June 21, 1995, in the matter of grant of exemp-
     tion from the eligibility test for appointment on the post of lecturer has a
    ·reasonable basis keeping in view the time taken in submitting the Ph.D
E    thesis or obtaining M.Phil degree by candidates who had undertaken the
     study for Ph.D or M.Phil degree prior to the issuance of the 1991 Regula-
     tions and the date, December 31, 1993 cannot be held to be capricious or
     whimsical or wide of the reasonable mark. The High Court of Punjab and
     Haryana has proceeded on the basis that the cut off date for the purpose
     of granting exemption from eligibility test should have nexus with the date
F    of the advertisement inviting applications for appointment on the post of
     Lecturers. The High Court was in error in taking this view. The exemption
     from eligibility test that has been granted under paragraph 5 of the adver-
     tisement dated January 23, 1995 is relatable to the introduction of the
     requirement of eligibility test in the 1991 Regulations. The object underly-
G    ing the grant of exemption is to mitigate the resultant hardship to can-
     didates who had registered for Ph.D degree or had joined the course for
     M.Phil degree on the basis of the minimum qualifications prescribed under
     the 1982 Regulations. The validity of the fixation of cut off date for the
     purpose of grant of exemption from the eligibility test has to be considered
H    with reference to the date of issuance of the 1991 regulations and not with
                 U.G.C. v. S.CHAUDHARY[S.C.AGRAWAL,J.]                  407

  reference to the date of advertisement inviting applications for appoint- A
  ment on the post of Lecturers. We are, therefore, unable to uphold the
  direction of the High Court that it would not be necessary to appear in the
  eligibility test for candidates who have applied or/are applying for the
  Lecturers posts pursuant to the advertisement dated January 23, 1995 if
  they have obtained M.Phil degrees or submitted Ph.D thesis before Decem- B
  her 31, 1994, i.e., prior to the date of the publication or advertisement
  dated January 23, l995 and the further directi.on to the Haryana Public
  Service Commission and State of Haryana to ensure that as and when any
  such advertisement is issued, they would bear in mind that the eligibility
  dates be not far off from the date of advertisement. The exemption from C
  the requirement regarding clearing the eligibility test has to be confined
  within the limits indicated in the amendment introduced in the 1991
  Regulations by notification dated June 21, 1995. Respondents Nos. 1 and
  2 who had moved the High Court by filing the writ petition obtained their
  M.Phil degrees prior to December 31, 1993. They would be entitled to
  exemption from clearing the eligibility test under the terms of the notifica- D
  tion dated June 15, 1995. The decision of the High Court, in so far as it
  relates to the said respondents, is not required to be disturbed and is,
  therefore, maintained.

        We may now come to the validity of the exemption from the require- E
  ment regarding clearing the eligibility test that has been granted under the
  Circulars dated February 10, 1993 and June 15, 1995 and the notification
  dated June 21, 1995. Shri S.B. Sanyal; the learned senior counsel appearing
  for the appellants in Civil Appeal arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 27375 of
  1995, has submitted that having regard to the report of the National
  Commission on Teachers II and the report of the Mehrotra Committee,
                                                                                F
  which form the basis for introducing this requirement by the UGC in the
  1991 Regulations, there is no rational basis for granting exemption from
  the eligibility test to candidate who had submitted Ph.D thesis or passed
  the M.Phil examination by December 31, 1993. We find no merit in this
  contention. Prior to the making of the 1991 Regulations there was no G
  statutory requirement regarding clearing the eligibility test for the purpose
  of appointment on the post of Lecturer. Such a requirement was intro-
• duced for the first time by the 1991 Regulations. At the time when the 1991
  Regulations were made the provisions contained in the 1982 Regulations
  had given rise to a legitimate expectation that a person having a Ph.D or H
    408                   SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1996) SUPP. 6 S.C : ..

A M.Phil degree and having good academic record as prescribed under the
  1982 Regulations would be eligible for appointment on the post of Lecturer
  without anything more. While intrqducing the. requirement of clearing the
  eligibility test in the 1991 Regulations, the UGC did not intend to deprive
  the persons who had obtained M.Phil degree or Ph.D degree prior to the
B making of the 1991 Regulations of their legitimate expectation in the matter
  of appointment on the post of Lecturer in universities or colleges. It was
  also felt that the said. requirement in the 1991 Regulations should not
  operate to the prejudice of persons who, having regard to the qualifications
  prescribed in the 1982 Regulations, had registered for the Ph.D degree or
  had joined study for M.Phil degree course prior to making of the 1991
C Regulations and, therefore, provision was made for granting exemption to
  such candidates with the condition that they should have passed M.Phil
  examination or should have submitted Ph.D thesis by a garticular date. In
  so far as the date of submission of Ph.D thesis is concerned, the said date,
  i.e., December 31, 1993, has remained unchanged in the Circulars dated
D February 10, 1993 and June 15, 1993 and the notification dated June 21,
  1995. For M.Phil degree the date was, however, changed from March 31,
  1991 to December 31, 1992 by Circular dated June 15, 1993 and from
  December 31, 1992 to December 31, 1993 by notification dated June 21,
  1995. The amendment in the 1991 Regulations that has been made by the
E notification dated June 21, 1995, in substances, postpones the date of
  applicability of the requirement regarding clearing the eligibility test in the
  1991 Regulations till December 31, 1993 in respect of candidates who had
  joined the M.Phil course or registered for Ph.D degree. Such candidates
  constitute a distinct class who could be treated separately in so far as the
  requirement of clearing the eligibility test was concerned. Such a classifica-
F tion of the candidates for the purpose of applicability of the requirement
  of clearing the eligibility test has a rational basis which has a reasonable
  nexus with the object sought to be achieved by the 1991 Regulations. We
  are, therefore, unable to hold that the exemption that has been granted by
  the amendment introduced in the 1991 regulations by notification dated
G June 21, 1995 is violative of the right to equality guaranteed under Article
  14 of the Constitution.

    ..    Shri Sanyal has also raised the question regarding the validity of the
    two Ordinances promulgated by the Governor of Bihar on December 8,
    1994 and the legislative enactments which have now replaced the Ordinan-
H
               U.G.C. v. S. CHAUDHARY [S.C.AGRAWAL,J.]                    409

ces and has urged that since the 1991 Regulations that have been made by         A
the U GC in exercise of the power conferred under Section 26 of the Act
which has been enacted by Parliament under Entry 66 of List I (Union
List) of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution, the Bihar State Legisla-
ture was not competent to legislate in this field and the legislation enacted
by the Bihar State Legislature is ultra vires the legislative powers conferred   B
on the Bihar State Legislature under the Constitution and that the Patna
High Court was in error in upholding the validity of the Ordinances. We
do not consider it necessary to go into this question. The grievance of the
appellants in their writ petition before the High Court was against the
corrigendum dated December 25, 1994 issued by Bihar State University             C
Service Commission whereby it was prescribed as under :

        "The candidates who have already done M.Phil upto 31st decem-
        ber, 1992 or who have done or submitted Ph.D thesis upto 31st
        December, 1993 or have qualified i_ll the NET/JRF Tests of
        UGC/CSIR are exempted from appearing at the BET to be con-               D
        ducted by Bihar State University Service Commission."

      This grant of exemption was in accord with the Circulars dated
February 10, 1993 and June 15, 1993 that had been issued by the UGC. As
noticed earlier Bihar Eligibility Test that was conducted by Bihar State         E
University Service Commission on June 18, 1995 has been accredited by
the UGC on February 12, 1996 and further tests to be held in the period
1995-1997 have also been accredited with certain recommendations. The
grant of exemption from the eligibility test in the Corrigendum, therefore,
does not run contrary to the requirement prescribed by the U GC in the
1991 Regulations read with Circulars dated February 10, 1993 and June 15,
                                                                                 F
1993 which were applicable at that time. The question regarding validity of
the two Ordinances and the legislative enactments replacing them is,
therefore, left open.

       In the result, Civil Appeal arising out of S.L.P.(C) No. 27375of1995      G
is dismissed. Civil Appeal arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 16220 of 1995 is
partly allowed to the extent that the direction given by. the High Court of
Punjab and Haryana that it would not be necessary to appear in the
eligibility test for candidates who have applied or/are applying for the
lecturers' posts pursuant to the advertisement dated January 23, 1995, if        H
    410                   SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1996) SUPP. 6 S.C.R.

A   they have obtained M.Phil degrees or submitted Ph.D thesis before Decem-
    ber 31, 1994, i.e., prior to the date of the publication of advertisement, and
    further directing the Haryana Public Service Commission and State of
    Haryana to ensure that as and when any such advertisement is issued, they
    would bear in mind that the eligibility dates be not far off from the date
B   of advertisement, are set aside and it is declared that the exemption from
    eligibility test for the purpose of appointment on the post Lecturer will
    have to be confined to candidates fulfilling the requirements in the 1991
    Regulations as amended by notification dated June 21, 1995. The direction
    given by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana in so far as respondents
    Nos. 1 and 2 are concerned is not disturbed.
c
           No orders as to costs.

    S.S.                                           C.A. No. 12308/96 dismissed.
                                               C.A. No. 12284/96 partly allowed.