IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.13637 of 2010(O&M) Date of Decision : November 28, 2011. Saurabh Goklaney .....Petitioner versus National Institute of Pharmaceutical Education & Research .....Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. Present : Mr.Pawan Kumar Goklaney, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.K.K.Gupta, Advocate, for the respondent. -.- 1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? --- Surya Kant, J. (Oral) The petitioner had got admission in M.S. (Pharm.) in Pharmaceutics in Industry Sponsorship Category in the respondent-Institute in September, 2010. The duration of the Course is two years comprising four semesters. A Co-ordinate Bench on 7.9.2010 directed the respondent- Institute to admit the petitioner provisionally in the aforesaid course. It may be mentioned here that the petitioner was being denied admission by the respondent-Institute only on the premise that the requisite two years' experience relied upon was not of the same organization, namely, who sponsored his name, rather it was from more than one organizations. CWP No.13637 of 2010 (O&M) [2] In the reply-affidavit filed by the respondent-Institute, reliance is placed on Rule 6.3 of the Information Brochure-2010, which reads as under:- “6.3. Candidate is required to submit experience certificate of at least two years duration from his/her employer. Candidate should have completed duration period as on 27.7.2010.” The petitioner, on the other hand, makes reference to Rule 6.2 of the Information Brochure-2010, which is reproduced as below:- “6.2. Candidates must submit a “Sponsorship Certificate” on a proper letter-head (as per format given at Annexure-2) stating that for the period of his/her studies in the Institute the candidate would be treated on duty with usual salary and allowances and that he/she will be relieved for the period of pursuing his/her studies and that the fees of the candidate will be paid by the sponsoring organisation. Candidates seeking admission on the basis of study leave must show proof to the effect that he/she will be/has been granted leave for the period of study in the Institute.” The petitioner has also relied upon the Sponsorship Certificate format appended by the respondent-Institute with the Admission Brochure which categorically requires to certify that “as per the records available with our Organization, Mr/Ms. has a total experience of two years/more than two years in our Organization and other Organizations, he/she has worked earlier......” Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after going through the provisions, referred to above, I am of the considered view that CWP No.13637 of 2010 (O&M) [3] the objection raised by the respondent-Institute is wholly misconceived and unsustainable. I say so for the reason that if Rule 6.3 relied upon by the respondent-Institute is read in continuity with Rule 6.2, referred to by the petitioner, it inter-alia, provides that the candidate must submit the sponsorship certificate on a proper letter-head as per the format given in Annexure-2. The format of sponsorship certificate leaves no manner of doubt that the experience gained by a candidate in another Organization where he had earlier served, is also valid for the purpose of eligibility, provided that such experience is duly certified by the present sponsoring employer. If one reads Rule 6.2 in this backdrop, there remains no scope for misconstruction of that Rule in as much as the phrase “from his/her employer”, is referable to the “experience certificate” and not to the words “at least two years” The petitioner who had more than two years experience, duly certified by the employer who sponsored his name, was thus fully eligible for the subject admission. For the reasons afore-stated, the writ petition is allowed and the respondent-Institute is directed to regularize the provisional admission already granted to the petitioner. The necessary consequences including declaration of result etc. shall also follow. Dasti. November 28, 2011 (SURYA KANT) Mohinder JUDGE