LPA No.2039 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. LPA No. 2039 of 2011 Date of decision 6.12.2011 Guru Nanak Dev University and others . Appellants Versus Charanjit Kaur .. Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.KUMAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV NARAIN RAINA Present: Mr.Amrit Paul , Advocate for the appellants Mr. Sandeep Wadhawan, Advocate for the respondent 1. To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 2. Whether the judgement should be reported in the Digest ? M.M.KUMAR,J. 1. The instant appeal under Clause X of the Letters Patent is directed against inter-locutory order dated 14.10.2011 passed by the learned Single Judge granting admission to the petitioner- respondent to Ph.D. Programme subject to her furnishing of undertaking for improving her marks in LL.M. Degree making her eligible in accordance with rules of Ph.D. Programme for the session 2011-12. It was also observed that if the petitioner- respondent did not improve her marks in LL.M. Degree then the University was free to cancel the admission. It is against the aforesaid order of the learned Single Judge that the Guru Nanak Dev University has preferred the instant appeal. It is conceded as a fact that the writ petitioner- respondent has secured 54.42 marks in LL.M. as against the requirement of 55 marks to qualify for admission to Ph.D. programme. It is also conceded that admission to Ph.D. course is to be made on the basis of 'Ph.D. eligibility test' conducted at the level of the appellant- university keeping in view the LPA No.2039 of 2011 2 mandatory UGC Ph.D. Regulations of 2009 as incorporated and laid down in Ordinance 2 (R.1). In accordance with the ordinance, the minimum essential eligibility qualification for admission to Ph.D. course was notified in the admission notice issued in July, 2011 (P.4) which prescribes the eligibility of securing 55 marks at the Master's level. It was also clarified in the general ordinance that if the fraction is less than 0.5 marks then it cannot be rounded off to the next of whole number. The writ petitioner- respondent had secured 54.42 marks and therefore could not take advantage of even rounding off. By the interim order provisional admission could not have been granted because it would amount of allowing the writ petition by the interim order particularly when there is no power of relaxation available under the University statute. 2. In view of the above, the appeal is allowed. Interim order dated 14.10.2011 is set aside to the extent it grants admission provisionally to the petitioner-appellant to Ph.D. programme. We make it clear that any observation made in the instant order should not constitute as an expression of opinion on the merits of case which may be decided without being influenced thereby. (M.M.Kumar) Judge (Rajiv Narain Raina) 6.12.2011 Judge okg