MOHAMMAD ALI v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. ADDL. CHIEF SECY. DEPTT. OF HIGHER EDUCATION LKO. AND 7 OTHERS
WRIC/6595/2025 · 2025-07-18
Pankaj Bhatia
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 150803 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 150803 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:41127 Court No. - 7 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 6595 of 2025 Petitioner :- Mohammad Ali Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Higher Education Lko. And 7 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sumeet Tahilramani,Shiv Pratap Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Atul Kumar Dwivedi,Sanjeev Kumar Srivastava Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.
1. Heard Shri Sumeet Tahilramani, learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Sudeep Seth, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Shri Atul Kumar Dwivedi, learned counsel for the respondent Nos.2 to 7, Shri Sanjeev Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for respondent No.8 and learned Standing Counsel for respondent No.1.
2. The present petition has been filed with the following reliefs:
"i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the decision taken in 17th meeting of Research Degree Committee held on 06.11.2023 mentioned under Clause 2/4 (ka) & (Kha), to extent it relates to the petitioner (Annexure No.1) and ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite parties to enable the petitioner having enrollment no.Ph.D.- POL/2017-2018/02 to submit his Pre-Submission Viva of Ph.D. thesis and to conclude the Ph.D. Course."
3. The contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that by means of the Annexure No.1 to the writ petition, the request of the petitioner has been rejected on the ground of taking recourse to the ordinance 2018, whereas the applicable Ordinance in the case of the petitioner should be the Ordinance which is prior to the said Ordinance and the case of the petitioner should be considered in terms of the Ordinance of 2014 as has been done in the case of similarly placed persons.
4. Shri Sudeep Seth, learned Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondents assures this Court that the case of the petitioner shall be reconsidered in the light of the benefit granted to the similarly placed persons and in the light of the judgement of this Court passed in Writ-C No.2774 of 2024 decided on 16th October, 2024.
5. In view of the said, the present petition is disposed of directing respondent No.4/competent authority to pass a fresh
order considering the application of the petitioner. While doing so, the respondent will take into consideration the judgement of this Court referred above as well as the fact that the similar benefit has been extended to the similarly placed persons. The fresh order shall be passed within a period of three weeks from today. The fresh order will abide and the order impugned shall be subsumed with the fresh order.
Order Date :- 18.7.2025 Ashutosh Digitally signed by :- ASHUTOSH PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench