1 CWP-31953-2019 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 216 CWP-31953-2019 Date of Decision: 20.07.2026 Ashwani Sharma ....Petitioner VERSUS Kurukshetra University, Kurukshetra and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR Present : Mr. S.K. Nehra, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Anuj Chauhan, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Akshit Pathania, AAG, Haryana. Mr. Prateek Mahajan with Mr. Daanish Mahajan, Advocates for respondents No.1 and 2-University. Mr. Ashutosh Kaushik, Advocate with Mr. Amit Bansal, Advocate for respondent No.4. Mr. R.K. Malik, Sr. Advocate with Mr.Sandeep Dhull, Advocate for respondent No.5. HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J. (Oral) CM-10070-2023 IN CWP-31953-2023 The present application has been filed under Section 151 of CPC on behalf of respondents No.1 and 2 for placing on record documents Annexure R-1/7 to R-1/13 and also for grant of exemption from filing certified copy thereof. PUNEET CHAWLA 2026.07.30 14:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 2 CWP-31953-2019 (O&M) In view of the grounds mentioned in the application, the same is allowed. Annexures R-1/7 to R-1/13 are ordered to be taken on record, subject to all just exceptions. Registry is directed to place the same at an appropriate place. MAIN 1. The present writ petition has been filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ in the nature of Certiorari for quashing the interviews of respondents No.4 and 5 conducted by respondent-University on 20.02.2019 pursuant to the advertisement No.1/2018 dated 14.03.2018 (Annexure P-2) qua the post of Librarian. It is further prayed that the notice dated 19.01.2019 (Annexure P-10) be quashed whereby respondents No.4 and 5 have been shortlisted and called for interview, and the respondent-University be directed to conduct the interview afresh as per the terms of the advertisement and the UGC Regulations on minimum qualifications for appointment of teachers and other academic staff in universities and colleges and measures for the maintenance of standards in higher education, 2010 (Annexure P-3) (hereinafter referred to as ‘UGC Regulations, 2010’). CONTENTIONS 2. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends that the petitioner is aggrieved by the action of respondent-University in shortlisting respondents No.4 and 5 for interview for the post of Librarian, PUNEET CHAWLA 2026.07.30 14:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 3 CWP-31953-2019 (O&M) despite the fact that they neither possess nor fulfil the essential eligibility conditions prescribed under Advertisement No.1/2018 dated 14.03.2018 (Annexure P-2) as well as UGC Regulations, 2010 (Annexure P-3). Learned Senior Counsel draws the attention of this Court to page 40 of the paper book and submits that the essential qualification prescribed under the advertisement for the post of Librarian is a Master’s Degree in Library Science/Information Science/Documentation with at least 55% marks, coupled with at least 13 years’ experience as a Deputy Librarian in a University Library or 18 years’ experience as a College Librarian, apart from the other qualifications stipulated therein. He further refers to Clause 4.5.1 of the UGC Regulations, 2010 at page 117 of the paper book (Annexure P-3), which prescribes the very same eligibility conditions for direct recruitment to the post of Librarian. 2.1 Learned Senior Counsel further refers to Clauses 4.5.2 and 4.5.3 of the aforesaid Regulations and submits that the UGC has consciously prescribed separate and distinct qualifications and experience for the posts of Librarian, Deputy Librarian and College Librarian, thereby treating them as separate cadres carrying different eligibility requirements. It is contended that respondents No.4 and 5 do not possess the requisite experience either as Deputy Librarian for 13 years or as College Librarian for 18 years. Rather, they have been shortlisted by reckoning their experience as Assistant Librarians in a University, although neither Advertisement No.1/2018 (Annexure P-2) nor the UGC Regulations, 2010 (Annexure P-3) recognize PUNEET CHAWLA 2026.07.30 14:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 4 CWP-31953-2019 (O&M) such experience as equivalent to that of Deputy Librarian or College Librarian. It is argued that in the absence of any statutory provision, notification or equivalence clause, the respondent-University could not have treated the experience of Assistant Librarian as equivalent to the experience specifically prescribed in the advertisement and the UGC Regulations. 2.2. Learned Senior Counsel submits that the controversy is squarely covered by the Full Bench judgment of this Court in Som Dutt v. State of Haryana and others, 1983 (3) SLR 141 decided on 25.11.1983, wherein it has been held that the prescribed qualification has to be strictly complied with and neither a higher qualification nor any other qualification can be treated as equivalent unless the Rules or the competent authority specifically so provide. Reliance is further placed upon the judgment of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Vikas Sharma v. State of Haryana and others, 2014 (11) SCT 274 decided on 20.01.2014, which was subsequently affirmed by the Division Bench in Satish Kumar v. State of Haryana and others, LPA No.1121 of 2014, decided on 10.09.2014, reiterating that eligibility has to be examined strictly in accordance with the prescribed qualifications and that no equivalence can be presumed in the absence of an express provision. The judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in Jagtar Singh v. State of Punjab and others, LPA No.1378 of 2009, decided on 25.03.2010 has also reiterated the same principle. PUNEET CHAWLA 2026.07.30 14:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 5 CWP-31953-2019 (O&M) 2.3. Learned Senior Counsel has also relied upon the judgment of the Division Bench of the Gauhati High Court in Guru Prashad Chakraborty v. Tripura University and others, Writ Appeal No.65 of 1997, decided on 19.02.2004, wherein while interpreting an identical eligibility condition for appointment to the post of Librarian, it was held that in the absence of any provision recognizing equivalence, experience as Assistant Librarian cannot be treated as equivalent to the prescribed experience as Deputy Librarian. It is, therefore, submitted that respondents No.4 and 5 were ineligible on the last date of submission of applications and their shortlisting and consideration for interview is wholly contrary to the eligibility conditions contained in Advertisement No.1/2018 (Annexure P-2) as well as the UGC Regulations, 2010 (Annexure P-3), and is consequently liable to be set aside. 3. Per contra, learned counsel for respondents No.1 and 2 as well as learned Senior Counsel appearing for respondents No.4 and 5 oppose the present writ petition and submit that respondents No.4 and 5 fully satisfy the prescribed eligibility conditions for appointment to the post of Librarian. It is contended that the UGC Regulations, 2010 were duly adopted by the respondent-University vide notification dated 21.07.2011 (Annexure R-1/1), much prior to the issuance of Advertisement No.1/2018, and the selection process has been conducted strictly in accordance therewith. Learned counsel submits that under the scheme of the UGC Regulations, particularly Appendix-III, Table-VII, read along with the relevant provisions governing PUNEET CHAWLA 2026.07.30 14:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 6 CWP-31953-2019 (O&M) service conditions, the posts of Assistant Librarian in a University Library and College Librarian are treated as interchangeable for service purposes and, consequently, the experience gained on either post is liable to be reckoned for determining eligibility for appointment as University Librarian. 3.1 It is further contended that the respondent-University has consistently followed the aforesaid interpretation even prior to the present selection. In this regard, reliance has been placed upon various transfer orders (Annexures R-1/7), which, according to the respondents, demonstrate that incumbents holding the post of Assistant Librarian in the University Library were transferred and posted as College Librarians and vice versa, thereby evidencing that the two posts have been treated as interchangeable by the University. Moreover, it is submitted that in an earlier selection process, the respondent-University had similarly reckoned the experience of Assistant Librarians while considering candidates for appointment to the post of Librarian, as reflected from Annexures R-1/8. It is argued that the petitioner himself participated in the said selection process without questioning the eligibility of candidates possessing experience as Assistant Librarians and is, therefore, estopped from raising such a challenge in the present proceedings. 3.2 Learned counsel further submits that the same practice has been followed by other Universities as well. Reference has been made to the recruitment processes undertaken by Guru Jambheshwar University of PUNEET CHAWLA 2026.07.30 14:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 7 CWP-31953-2019 (O&M) Science and Technology, Maharshi Dayanand University and other institutions, as reflected from Annexures R-1/10 to R-1/12, wherein experience as Assistant Librarian/College Librarian has been considered for appointment to the post of Librarian. It is also pointed out that respondent No.4 had participated in and was selected in one such recruitment process. 3.3 On the strength of the aforesaid material, learned counsel submits that the consistent interpretation adopted by the respondent- University as well as other Universities establishes that experience as Assistant Librarian in a University Library and as College Librarian is treated alike for the purpose of determining eligibility under the UGC Regulations, 2010. It is therefore argued that respondents No.4 and 5 possessed the requisite experience on the last date prescribed under Advertisement No.1/2018 and were rightly shortlisted for interview. Consequently, the writ petition, being devoid of merit, deserves to be dismissed. OBSERVATIONS & ANALYSIS 4. I have heard learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondents No.1 and 2, learned Senior Counsel appearing for respondents No.4 and 5, and have perused the record with their able assistance. PUNEET CHAWLA 2026.07.30 14:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 8 CWP-31953-2019 (O&M) 5. This Court is of the considered view that the controversy involved in the present writ petition lies in a narrow compass. The grievance of the petitioner is that respondents No.4 and 5 have been illegally shortlisted and called for interview for appointment to the post of University Librarian despite not possessing the requisite experience of thirteen years as Deputy Librarian in a University Library or eighteen years as College Librarian, as prescribed under Advertisement No.1/2018 dated 14.03.2018 (Annexure P-2) as well as the UGC Regulations, 2010 (Annexure P-3). The stand of the respondent-University, on the other hand, is that respondents No.4 and 5 satisfy the eligibility criteria in terms of the UGC Regulations, 2010, as adopted by the University vide notification dated 21.07.2011 (Annexure R-1/1), and that the experience rendered by them as Assistant University Librarians is liable to be reckoned for determining their eligibility for appointment to the post of University Librarian. 6. Since the controversy centres around the interpretation of the eligibility conditions prescribed under the UGC Regulations, 2010 and their applicability to the recruitment in question, it would be apposite to reproduce the relevant provisions thereof:- “4.5.0 MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS FOR DIRECT RECRUITMENT TO THE POSTS OF LIBRARIAN, DEPUTY LIBRARIAN AND UNIVESRITY ASSISTANT LIBRARIAN / COLLEGE LIBRARIAN PUNEET CHAWLA 2026.07.30 14:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 9 CWP-31953-2019 (O&M) 4.5.1 UNIVERSITY LIBRARIAN i. A Master’s Degree in Library Science /Information Science/documentation with at least 55% marks or its equivalent grade of B in the UGC seven points scale and consistently good academic record set out in these Regulations. ii. At least thirteen years as a Deputy Librarian in a university library or eighteen years’ experience as a College Librarian. iii. Evidence of innovative library service and organization of published work. iv. Desirable: A. M.Phil./Ph.D. Degree in library science/information science /documentation/achieves and manuscript- keeping. 4.5.2. DEPUTY LIBRARIAN i. A Master’s Degree in library science/information science/documentation with at least 55% of the marks or its equivalent grade of B in the UGC seven point scale and a consistently good academic record. ii. Five years experience as an Assistant University Librarian/College Librarian. iii. Evidence of innovative library service and organization of published work and professional commitment, computerization of library. iv. Desirable: A M.Phil./Ph.D. Degree in library science/Information science /Documentation /Archives and manuscript-keeping /computerization of library. 4.5.3 UNIVERSITY ASSISTANT LIBRARIAN / COLLEGE LIBRARIAN i. A Master’s Degree in Library Science / Information Science / Documentation Science or an equivalent professional degree with at least 55% marks (or an equivalent grade in a point scale wherever PUNEET CHAWLA 2026.07.30 14:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 10 CWP-31953-2019 (O&M) grading system is followed) and a consistently good academic record with knowledge of computerization of library. ii. Qualifying in the national level test conducted for the purpose by the UGC or any other agency approved by the UGC. iii. However, candidates, who are, or have been awarded Ph. D. degree in accordance with the “University Grants Commission (Minimum Standards and Procedure for Award of Ph.D. Degree), Regulations 2009, shall be exempted from the requirement of the minimum eligibility condition of NET/SLET/SET for recruitment and appointment of University Assistant Director of Physical Education/ College Director of Physical Education & Sports. xx xx xx 6.6.0 STAGES OF PROMOTION UNDER THE CAREER ADVANCEMENT SCHEME FOR ASSISTANT LIBRARIANS, ETC. 6.6.1 Assistant University Librarian / College Librarian in the entry level grade, possessing Ph.D. in Library Science, after completing service of four years in the lowest grade, if otherwise eligible as per API scoring system and PBAS methodology laid down by the UGC in these Regulations, shall be eligible for the higher grade (stage 2). 6.6.2 Assistant Librarian / College Librarian in the entry level grade, not possessing Ph.D. but only M.Phil. in Library Science, after completing service of five years in the lowest grade, if otherwise eligible as per API scoring system and PBAS methodology laid down by the UGC in these Regulations, shall become eligible for the next higher grade (stage 2). 6.6.3 Assistant Librarian / College Librarian in the entry level grade, without the relevant Ph.D. or M.Phil. after completing six years in the lowest grade, if otherwise eligible as per API scoring system and PUNEET CHAWLA 2026.07.30 14:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 11 CWP-31953-2019 (O&M) PBAS methodology laid down by the UGC in these Regulations, shall become eligible for the next higher grade (stage 2). 6.6.4. On completion of service of five years, Assistant Librarian (Sr. Scale) / College Librarian (Sr. Scale) shall be eligible for the post of Deputy Librarian/ equivalent posts and being placed in the next higher grade (stage 3), subject to their fulfilling other conditions of eligibility (such as Ph.D. Degree, etc. for Deputy Librarian) as per API scoring system based PBAS methodology laid down by the UGC for CAS promotion in these Regulations. They shall be designated as Deputy Librarian / Assistant Librarian (Selection Grade) / College Librarian (Selection Grade), as the case may be. 6.6.5. After completing three years in the above grade, Deputy Librarians /equivalent positions shall move to the next higher grade (stage 4), subject to fulfilling other conditions of eligibility as per API scoring system and PBAS methodology laid down by the UGC for CAS promotion in these Regulations.” (Emphasis added) “SCHEDULE FOR CLAUSE 6.8.0 (FOR PAY SCALES, DESIGNATIONS AND STAGES OF PROMOTION UNDER CAS OF INCUMBENT AND NEWLY APPOINTED ASSISTANT PROFESSORS/ ASSOCIATE PROFESSORS/ PROFESSORS AND OTHER EQUIVALENT CADRES IN LIBRARY AND PHYSICAL EDUCATION AND SPORTS IN CENTRAL UNIVERSITIES AND COLLEGES THEREUNDER AND INSTITUTIONS DEEMED TO BE UNIVERSITIES WHOSE MAINTENANCE EXPENDITURE IS MET BY THE UGC). xx xx xx PUNEET CHAWLA 2026.07.30 14:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 12 CWP-31953-2019 (O&M) 6.0. PAY SCHALES AND CAREER ADVANCEMENT SCHEMES REGULATIONS FOR LIBRARIANS, ETC. 6.1. ASSISTANT UNIVERSITY LIBRARIAN / COLLEGE LIBRARIAN: (i) Assistant Librarian / College Librarian in the pre-revised scale of pay of Rs. 8,000– Rs. 13,500 shall be placed in the Pay Band of Rs.15,600 – Rs. 39,100 with AGP of Rs. 6,000. (ii) All conditions of eligibility and academic qualifications laid down by the UGC as per these Regulations, shall be applicable for direct recruitment of Assistant University Librarian / College Librarian. 6.2 ASSISTANT UNIVERSITY LIBRARIAN (SR. SCALE) / COLLEGE LIBRARIAN (SR. SCALE): (i) Assistant University Librarian (Sr. Scale)/ College Librarian (Sr. Scale) in the prerevised scale of pay of Rs.10,000 – Rs. 15,200 shall be placed in the Pay Band of Rs.15,600 – Rs. 39,100 with AGP of Rs.7,000. (ii) Assistant University Librarian / College Librarian possessing Ph.D. in Library Science, after completing service of four years in the AGP of Rs. 6,000, and if otherwise eligible as per API scoring system, and PBAS methodology laid down by the UGC in these Regulations, shall be eligible for the higher AGP of Rs. 7,000 with the Pay Band of Rs.15,600 – Rs. 39,100. (iii) Assistant Librarian / College Librarian not possessing Ph.D. but only M.Phil. in Library Science at the entry level after completing service of five years in the AGP of Rs. 6,000, if otherwise eligible as per API scoring system and PBAS methodology laid down by the UGC in these Regulations, shall become eligible for the higher AGP of Rs. 7,000. PUNEET CHAWLA 2026.07.30 14:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 13 CWP-31953-2019 (O&M) (iv) After completing service of six years in the AGP of Rs. 6,000 Assistant Librarian / College Librarian without the relevant Ph.D. and M.Phil. shall, if otherwise eligible as per API scoring system and PBAS methodology laid down by the UGC in these Regulations, move to the higher AGP of Rs. 7,000. (v) The pay of the existing Assistant Librarian (Sr. Scale) / College Librarian (Sr. Scale) in the pre-revised scale of pay of Rs.10,000 – Rs.15,200 shall be fixed in the Pay Band of Rs.15,600 – Rs. 39,100 with AGP of Rs.7,000 at an appropriate stage based on their present pay. 6.3. DEPUTY LIBRARIAN / ASSISTANT LIBRARIAN (SELECTION GRADE) / COLLEGE LIBRARIAN (SELECTION GRADE): (i) Deputy Librarians who are directly recruited shall be placed in the Pay Band of Rs. 15,600 – Rs. 39,100 with AGP of Rs. 8,000 (ii) On completion of service of five years, Assistant Librarian (Sr. Scale) / College Librarian (Sr. Scale) shall be eligible for the post of Deputy Librarian/ equivalent posts in Pay Band of Rs.15,600 – Rs. 39,100, with Academic Grade Pay of Rs.8,000, subject to their fulfilling other conditions of eligibility (such as Ph.D.degree, etc. for Deputy Librarian) as per API scoring system based PBAS methodology laid down by the UGC for CAS promotion in these Regulations. They shall be designated as Deputy Librarian / Assistant Librarian (Selection Grade) / College Librarian (Selection Grade), as the case may be. xx xx xx 6.4. LIBRARIAN (UNIVERSITY): (i) The post of Librarian shall be in the Pay Band of Rs. 37,400 – Rs. 67,000 with the Academic Grade Pay of Rs.10,000. PUNEET CHAWLA 2026.07.30 14:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 14 CWP-31953-2019 (O&M) (ii) The conditions of eligibility and academic qualifications prescribed by the UGC in these Regulations, shall be adopted for appointment to the post of Librarian (University). (iii) Deputy Librarian completing service of three years in the AGP of Rs.9,000 and otherwise eligible as per the API scoring system and PBAS methodology developed in these Regulations, with a Ph.D. qualification shall also be eligible to be considered for appointment to the post of Librarian through open recruitment. (iv) Incumbent Librarian (University) shall be placed at the appropriate stage as per the ‘fixation formula’ provided as Appendix- II in the Pay Band of Rs. 37,400 – Rs.67,000 with AGP of Rs.10,000.” (Emphasis added) “APPENDIX I xx xx xx 5. Pay Scales and Career Advancement Scheme for Librarians etc: (a) Assistant Librarian / College Librarian: (i) Assistant Librarian/ College Librarian in the pre-revised scale of pay of Rs. 8000-13500 shall be placed in the Pay Band of Rs.15600- 39100 with AGP of Rs. 6000. (ii) All existing conditions of eligibility and academic qualifications laid down by the UGC shall continue to be applicable for direct recruitment of Assistant Librarian/ College Librarian.” (Emphasis added) “APPENDIX – III: TABLE –VII ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE INDICATORS (APIs) AND PROPOSED SCORES DEVELOPED BY UGC FOR ADOPTION OF PERFORMANCE BASED APPRAISAL SYSTEM (PBAS) FOR DIRECT APPOINTMENT/CAREER ADVANCEMENT SCHEME PUNEET CHAWLA 2026.07.30 14:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 15 CWP-31953-2019 (O&M) (CAS) PROMOTIONS APPLICABLE TO LIBRARIAN, (UNIVERSITY) DEPUTY LIBRARIAN AND ASSTT. LIBRARIAN /COLLEGE LIBRARIAN…” (Emphasis added) 7. A plain reading of Clause 4.5.1 undoubtedly shows that for direct recruitment to the post of University Librarian, a candidate is required to possess a Master’s Degree in Library Science/Information Science/Documentation together with at least thirteen years’ experience as a Deputy Librarian in a University Library or eighteen years’ experience as a College Librarian. However, the said provision cannot be read in isolation. The UGC Regulations, 2010 constitute a comprehensive statutory framework regulating not only the minimum qualifications for appointment but also the service conditions, pay scales, career advancement and promotional avenues of Library personnel working in Universities and Colleges. Therefore, the Regulations are required to be read harmoniously so as to give effect to the legislative intent underlying the entire scheme. 8. A conjoint reading of the provisions of the UGC Regulations, 2010, as reproduced above, reveals that the expressions “Assistant University Librarian/College Librarian”, “Assistant Librarian (Senior Scale)/College Librarian (Senior Scale)” and “Deputy Librarian/equivalent posts” have repeatedly been used by the UGC while prescribing pay scales, Career Advancement Scheme, senior scale, selection grade and promotional avenues. Clause 6.3(ii) under the ‘Schedule for Clause 6.8.0’ specifically PUNEET CHAWLA 2026.07.30 14:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 16 CWP-31953-2019 (O&M) provides that Assistant Librarian (Senior Scale)/College Librarian (Senior Scale) shall be eligible for promotion to the post of Deputy Librarian/equivalent posts, subject to fulfilment of the prescribed eligibility conditions. Likewise, Clause 6.6.4 reiterates the same position under the Career Advancement Scheme. These provisions clearly demonstrate that the UGC has envisaged an integrated service structure governing the cadre of Library personnel and has consistently treated Assistant University Librarian and College Librarian as constituting a common stream for service and promotional purposes. 9. The aforesaid interpretation also finds support from the contemporaneous record produced by the respondent-University. Annexure R-1/7 reveals that incumbents holding the posts of Assistant University Librarian and College Librarian were transferred from one post to the other by the respondent-University, thereby treating the said posts as interchangeable in service administration. Further, Annexures R-1/10 to R- 1/12 indicate that not only the respondent-University but also other Universities had consistently taken into consideration the experience gained on the said posts while undertaking recruitment to the post of University Librarian. The interpretation adopted by the respondent-University, therefore, cannot be said to be an isolated or arbitrary exercise undertaken only for the present recruitment but appears to be in consonance with the consistent administrative practice followed while implementing the UGC Regulations, 2010. PUNEET CHAWLA 2026.07.30 14:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 17 CWP-31953-2019 (O&M) 10. The principal contention of the petitioner is that respondents No.4 and 5 did not possess experience as Deputy Librarian or College Librarian and, therefore, their experience as Assistant University Librarians could not have been reckoned for determining eligibility under Clause 4.5.1 of the Regulations. This submission, however, cannot be accepted. If Clause 4.5.1 alone is read divorced from the remaining provisions of the Regulations, the interpretation suggested by the petitioner may appear plausible. However, such an approach would amount to ignoring the integrated statutory scheme embodied in the UGC Regulations. It is a settled principle of statutory interpretation that every provision of a statutory instrument has to be read harmoniously and effect has to be given to each provision so that the scheme of the legislation is preserved. Reading the Regulations as a whole, this Court is unable to hold that the respondent- University acted contrary to the statutory framework in reckoning the experience possessed by respondents No.4 and 5. 11. Moreover, the reliance placed by the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner upon the judgments rendered in Som Dutt (supra), Vikas Sharma (supra), Satish Kumar (supra), Jagtar Singh (supra) and Guru Prashad Chakraborty (supra) is wholly misplaced. The principle laid down in the aforesaid judgments is that where the statutory Rules prescribe a particular educational qualification, neither a higher qualification nor another qualification can ordinarily be treated as equivalent unless the Rules expressly so provide. There can be no quarrel with the said proposition. PUNEET CHAWLA 2026.07.30 14:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 18 CWP-31953-2019 (O&M) However, the controversy in the present case does not relate to the educational qualifications possessed by respondents No.4 and 5, which admittedly satisfy the prescribed requirements. The dispute is confined to the manner in which the experience requirement is to be construed under the comprehensive scheme of the UGC Regulations, 2010, as adopted and consistently implemented by the respondent-University. The aforesaid judgments were rendered in a different factual and statutory context and, therefore, do not govern the controversy involved in the present case. 12. This Court is also conscious of the settled principle that in matters relating to recruitment undertaken by Universities and other expert academic bodies, the scope of judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution is limited. Unless the action of the recruiting authority is shown to be arbitrary, mala fide, discriminatory or in clear violation of the governing statutory provisions, the Court will not substitute its own interpretation for that consistently adopted by the expert body entrusted with implementation of the Regulations. In the present case, no such infirmity has been established by the petitioner. 13. On the contrary, the material placed on record demonstrates that the respondent-University had adopted the UGC Regulations, 2010 much prior to the issuance of Advertisement No.1/2018 (Annexure P-2) and has consistently implemented the same while regulating the service conditions of Library personnel as well as during earlier recruitment PUNEET CHAWLA 2026.07.30 14:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 19 CWP-31953-2019 (O&M) processes. The transfer orders, previous selections and the recruitment processes undertaken by other Universities lend support to the stand of the respondent-University that the experience rendered as Assistant University Librarian and College Librarian has been treated alike for the purposes contemplated under the UGC Regulations. Such a consistent administrative interpretation, being in consonance with the overall scheme of the Regulations, does not call for interference in exercise of writ jurisdiction. CONCLUSION 14. In view of the foregoing discussion, finding no merit in the present writ petition, the same is hereby dismissed. 15. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. (HARPREET SINGH BRAR) JUDGE 20.07.2026 Puneet Chawla Whether speaking/reasoned. : Yes/No Whether Reportable. : Yes/No PUNEET CHAWLA 2026.07.30 14:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document