The High Court · 2025

in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondent no.3 to produce the CCTV footage of the examination which was conducled on 18-06-2024, from 1.00 PM to 7.00 P l\,4 and produce all connected records pertaining to the center no. 420103. lA NO: 3 OF 2024 Petition under Section 15'1 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to direct the respondent No.2 to not to conduct the counseling till petitioners result is been declared until the disposal of this writ petition. Counsel for the Petitioner: M/s. SAMAN AAFREEN [PARTY-IN-PERSON] Counsel for the Respondent No.1: GP FOR HIGHER EDUCATION Counsel for the Respondent No.2: SRI Dr. M.P.KASHYAP, SC FOR UGC Counsel for the Respondent No.4: SRI GADI PRAVEEN KUMAR, Dy. SOLICITOR GEN. OF INDIA The Court made the following: ORDER .) a HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN WRIT PETITION No.34613 OF 2024 ORDER: Heard learned Party-in-Person, leamed Govemment Pleader for Higher Education appearing on behalf of respondent No.l, Dr. M.P. Kashyap, leamed Standing Counsel for respondent No.2 - UGC and leamed Depu$ Solicitor General of India appearing on behalf of respondent No.4. Despite service ofnotice, there is no representation on behalf of respondent No.3.

2. CONTENTIONS OF THE PETITIONER: i) Pursuant to Notification issued by respondent No.2 for Ph.D., Entrance Examination, the petitioner has applied for Assistant Professor, Ph.D., Entrance Examination under respondent No.4 with the task of conducting UGC-NET, which is a test to determine the eligibility of Indian Nationals for Assistant Professor as well as Junior Research Fellowship and Ph.D., in Indian Universities and Colleges. ii) The UGC-NET is being conducted by respondent No.4. She has applied for the same vide Application No.240511120313 and Roll No.4201001365. iii) Respondent No.2 conducted the said examination on 18-06.2024 and the petitioner received Hall Ticket. She appeared for the \ \ 2 KL,J W.P No.34613 ot2024 said examination on 18.06.2024. Results were declared on 17.10.2024. ln the Marks Memo, it was mentioned that the petitioner was ,absent, the examination iv) She tried to contact respondent No.2. She could not get any response from respondent No.2. Therefore, she has filed the present writ petition to declare the action of respondent Nos.2 and 3 in mentioning the petitioner as .absent, in the result/score card as illegal and for a consequential direction to respondent Nos.2 and 3 to verifr the entire record and declare the result/score card of the petitioner and thereby imposing exemplary costs for the mental agony caused to the petitioner due to the lapses ofthe respondents.

3. CONTENTIO NS OF RESPONDE NT No.4: i) Respondent No.4 has filed counter contending that the Department of Higher Education, Ministry of Education, Govemment of India, established respondent No.4 with an objective to conduct effrcient, transparent and International standard tests in order to assess the competency of candidates for admission and recruitment process. ii) Respondent No.4 has been entrusted by respondent No.2 with the task of conducting UGC-NET, to determine eligibilig of Indian ( / { {1 Nationals for 'award of Junior Research Fellowship and appointment as 3 KI,,J w.P No.34613 of2024 Assistant Professor' and admission to Ph.D. etc iii) Therefore, respondent No.4 has issued notice dated

31.05.2024 in its Official Portal i.e., [email protected]. In response to the said Notification, the petitioner has applied for Assistant Professor and Ph.D., only. Examination was scheduled oo 18.06.2024 under due intimation to the candidates vide Public Notice dated 31 .05.2024. Admit Card was also issued online to the petitioner for the said examination. She has appeared on 18.06.2024. The said examination was held in Pen & Paper Mode (OMR based). iv) The said examination was cancelled as per the decision of the Ministry of Education, Government of India on 19.06.2024 on the basis of Inputs of the National Crime Threat Analt'tics Unit of Indian Cyber Crime Coordinate Centre (14C) under &e Ministry of Home Affairc, received through respondent No.2. Therefore, a copy of Press Release dated 19.06.2024 from the Press Information Bureau (PIB) and the lntel Report of 14C were also issued. The said examination was cancelled and result was never declared. v) Respondent No.4 has issued public notice dated 28.06.2024 published in the said examination website stating that UGC-NET June, 4 KI-,J w P. No.l46l3 of2024 2024 would be re-conducted in CBT (Computer Based Test) Mode during the period from 2l .08.2024 to 04.09.2024. vi) A Public Notice dated 02.08.2024 was also issued. The same are made availablc in the olficial website. vii) The Advanced Intimation Slip with regard to the name of Examination Citv as well as the dates etc. in CBT Mode was also issued to all the candidates including the petitioner under Intimation to them through publrc notice daled 14.08.2024. Candidates rvere advised through the said public notice to check/download their examination City Intimation Slip using their application number and date of birth- Helpline No.01 I -40759000 and e-mail at ugcnet(anta.ac.in was also made available to the candidates. viii) Accordingly, examination was re-conducted from 21.08.2024 to 04.09.202a and the subject law examination on 30.011.2024. The petitioner did not appear for the said examination. Manv candidates appeared, results of the candidates, who appeared lirr the said examination. were declared on 17 .10.2024. A Public Notice dated 17 .10.2024 rvas also released in the said website. ix) Since the petitioner was absent, in her marks memo, it is rocrftioned as 'absent'. Therefore, there is no eror on the part of o I I 5 KIJ wP No:]4511of2024 respondent No.4. The petitioner has to verifu the details from the official website of respondent No.4. x) All the details including date of examination i.e., 18.06.2024, cancellation of the same and re-scheduled it on 30.08.2024 are mentioned in the official website of respondent No.4. xi) The petitioner was negligent in going through the same and she did not appear for the examination re-scheduled on 30.08.2024 xii) Out of 11,21,225 candidates registered, 6,84,224 candidates appeared on 30.08.2024. 4970 candidates qualified for JRF, 53,694 candidates qualified for Assistant Professor Only and I,12,070 candidates qualified for Ph.D With the aforesaid submissions, respondent No.4 sought to dismiss the present writ petition.

4. ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS OF THE COURT: i) The aforesaid facts would reveal that the entire examination is online. Respondent No.4 has issued Notification. Downloading of hall tickets is only on its official website i.e., [email protected]. The said fact was also mentioned by the petitioner in the writ affidavit and the same is not in dispute. The petitioner has mentioned her hall ticket number, application number etc. Even according to her, entire process is online. 6 KL,J W P. No 34613 of2024 She has downloaded the hall ticket and appeared for the examination on

18.06.2024. Ihe said examination was cancelled on the suspicion of leakage of paper basing on thc report ol National Crime Threat Analytics Unit of Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre (l4C) under the Ministry of Home Affairs. Therefore, a decision was taken on

19.06.2024 to cancel the said examination. The said examination was rescheduled and it was held on 30.08.2024. Respondent No.4 has informed all the candidates by placing the said Notifrcation in its official website. Respondent No.4 has also requested all the candidates that they are going to re-conduct the examination in CBl' Mode (Computer Based Test). The said public notice dated 28.06.2024 is also placed in the aforesaid official website of respondent No.4. The aforesaid helpline number and e-mail was also placed. ii) It is relevant to note that the said UGC-NET examination is conducted for Assistant Professors and Ph.D. admissions. As discussed above, the entire process is online. The petitioner is aware of the said fact. She came to know about issuance of notice and conducting of examination on 18.06.2024 as well as the results declared on 17.10.2024 through official website of respondent No.4. Therefore, she cannot contend that she is unaware of cancellation of the said examination and rescheduling the same on 30.08.2024. Therefore, the contention of the I a 7 KL,J W.P. No.l46ll of2024 petitioner that though the said examination was held on 18.06.2024, results were declared only on 17.10.2024 and that she is unaware of the re-scheduling of the aforesaid examination on 30.08.2024 cannot be accepted. Having applied for the said examination by submitting application online, down-loading the hall ticket from the official website of respondent No.4, it is the duty of the petitioner to verifi other particulars including cancellation of examination, decision of re- conducting the same and conducting and declaration of results etc., by respondent No.4 in the aforesaid official website of respondent No.4. Therefore, the petitioner cannot blame respondent Nos.2 and 4 for her negligence. On assuming for a moment that the petitioner is unaware of the cancellation of examination and rescheduling the same on

30.08.2024, having appeared for the said examination on 18.06.2024, it is the duty of the petitioner to check from the oflicial website of respondent No.4 with regard to declaration of examination including marks card etc. The aforesaid notices including cancellation of examination held on 18.06.2024 and re-scheduled the same on

30.08.2024 etc., are placed in the official website of respondent No.4. The petitioner has to verifu the same and should have appeared in the re- scheduled examination held on 30.08.2024. She has not verified and she has not appeared. I l:' i 8 KL,J w P. No.34613 of2024 f: iii) During the course of hearing, the petitioner contended that she has received a message on her mobile number with a request to download the hall ticket with regard to the e:iamination held on

18.06.2024. When the examination was cancelled and re-scheduled on

30.08.2024, respondent No.4 did not send such intimation to her mobile number. But, she has not pleaded the said facts in the said writ affidavit. It is the specific contention of respondent No.4 that the entire process right from issuing the notification and cancellation of the same etc., are all through online. They never issued any intimation to the candidates through her/his mobile phones. In the light of the same, the said contention ofthe petitioner cannot be accepted. iv) During the course of hearing, it is brought to the notice of this Court that normally respondent No.4 will issue key to the answers within one (01) month from the date of examination and declare the results within three (03) months by placing the same in the official website of respondent No.4. In the present case, examination was held on

18.06.2024 and thereafter the petitioner has to veri$, with regard to key and declaration of results from the oflicial website of respondent No.4. Instead of doing so, she is trying to throw blame on respondent No.4. - v) As discussed above, in the present writ petition, the petitioner is seeking a direction to respondent Nos.2 and 3 to verify the entire -4 -t- I .. ...:i I l 9 KL,J w.P. No 34613 of 2024 record, declare her examination result/score card in respect of the aforesaid examination by imposing exemplary costs. As stated above, the aforesaid examination is for the purpose of admission into Ph.D., Course. The petitioner has to get rank, consequently apply to the College and obtain admission into the said Course. She is seeking admission into Ph.D., in Law. Therefore, she cannot seek a direction to respondent Nos.2 and3 to veri$r entire record, declare her results for the examination conducted on 18.06.2024 which was cancelled. Therefore, the present writ petition is misconceived and the same is liable to be dismissed.

5. CONCLUSION: The present writ petition IS accordingly dismissed. In the circumstances ofthe case. there shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the writ petition shall stand closed. //TRUE COPY// D/. T. VIJAY KUMAR TANT REGISTRAR S S SECTION OFFICER I To, 1 g?:i!,ff *?ii S6: hXf ;'ilg#ff '33["#i,t,f ?J5?;o?,1" niiJ[illE iiXnw'irl-Prnsoxt , ;;; C",o ,*, Dr' M'P'KASHYAP' sc FoR UGC [oPuc] I ;tt ** ;Ilf t?1,5 H5'ruSYYiEl'81;3'"'ic ^ +H8fi3;,t:, ff.i,.?*J8sf,* "'"o''o*' 5. Two CD Copies .ro R G EN oF I N D IA' High court ror the state or BSR GJP N :a '1::: lE& HIGH COUR'I DATED: 1110212025 E S.t 416 1 |] APR 2025 > z (-) --l \ .) \\ ')tr:,.,.rr_.. ORDER WP.No.34613 of 2024 DISMISSING THE WRIT PETITION, WITHOUT COSTS I I I