PROFESSOR MAHIPAL SINGH SIHAG SON OF SHRI RAMJAS SIHAG v. THE CHANCELLOR, UNIVERSITY OF RAJASTHAN
CW/2488/2024 · 2026-03-25
Inderjeet Singh, Ravi Chirania
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 5553 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 5553 (RAJ) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
[2026:RJ-JP:12645-DB] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2488/2024 Professor Mahipal Singh Sihag Son Of Shri Ramjas Sihag, Aged About 54 Years, Resident Of R-8, Rajasthan University Campus Jaipur, 302004 ----Petitioner Versus
1. The Chancellor, University Of Rajasthan, Jaipur And The Governor Of Rajasthan Through Its Principal Secretary, Raj Bhawan, Civil Lines, Jaipur-302006
2. The University Grants Commission, Through Its Secretary, Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi-110002.
3. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Secretary, Higher Education Department, Government Secretariat, Jaipur- 302005
4. The University Of Rajasthan, Through Its Registrar, Jln Marg, Jaipur-302004. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Dr. Savita Sihag. For Respondent(s) : Mr. Vishnu Kant Sharma. Mr. Vishal Choudhary on behalf of Mr. Abhinav Sharma.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJEET SINGH HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI CHIRANIA
Order 25/03/2026
1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with the following prayer:-
“In view of the facts and circumstances stated above, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to :- By way of a writ, order or direction in the nature thereof may kindly please declare the amendment made to Ordinance 124(5.8) vide notification
[2026:RJ-JP:12645-DB] (2 of 3) [CW-2488/2024] no. 24 dated 2.1.2024 for the admission process in Ph.D. degree of Candidates who are going to appear in examination in the subject of Geography dated 13.02.2024 through UNIRAJ-PAT-2021 & 2022 in the Ordinance of the University of Rajasthan be declared ultra- vires and unconstitutional. By way of a writ, order or direction in the nature thereof direct respondent no 4 to call the meeting of the syndicate and senate in this regard. By way of a writ, order or direction in the nature thereof may please to direct respondent university to adopt UGC
regulation
2022
dated 07.11.2022 without any tempering and in consonance and in line with the UGC regulations, 2022 and only following the process laid down in section 22(a) & 30 of the University of Rajasthan Act, 1946. By way of a writ, order or direction in the nature thereof may further be please to direct respondent no. 2 UGC to ensure strict compliance of the Regulations on minimum standards and Procedure for award of Ph.D. degrees in the Universities and Colleges and measures for the maintenance of standards in Higher Education. Any other appropriate order or direction which the Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case. Cost of the writ petition may also be awarded in favour of the petitioner.”
2. By way of this writ petition, the petitioner who is a Professor at the University of Rajasthan has challenged the notification dated 02.01.2024 issued by the University on the ground that the said notification has been issued in contravention of the UGC Rules and Regulations.
[2026:RJ-JP:12645-DB] (3 of 3) [CW-2488/2024]
3.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that prior to the issuance of the notification dated 02.01.2024, the proper procedure was not followed by the University. Learned counsel further submits that the Syndicate alone is empowered to issue any notification pertaining to rectification.
4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents has opposed the submissions made by the petitioner and contended that the petitioner has no locus standi to file the present writ petition challenging the notification dated 02.01.2024. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner himself is a member of the Department Research Committee (DRC) and the impugned notification has neither affected him nor caused any prejudice.
5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the present case, we are of the view that the petitioner himself is a member of the DRC Committee and has no locus standi to challenge the impugned notification.
7. In that view of the matter, the present writ petition stands dismissed.
(RAVI CHIRANIA),J (INDERJEET SINGH),J MG/48