S.N. Phukan, J. - (1.) By this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the writ petitioner has prayed for appropriate Mandamus directing the Vice Chancellor, the Registrar and the Director of Post Graduate ; Studies, Assam Agricultural University, Jorhat, Assam to hold viva-voce examination for the purpose of Ph. D Degree of the petitioner and has further prayed for quashing the resolution of the Academic Council of the said University adopted in the meeting held on 27.11.89 by which the earlier resolution of the said Council dated 2.5.86 was revised and it was also decided that writ petitioner should re-submit his thesis through Dr. P.K. Sarma, Retired Director, Post Graduate Studies of the University, Co-guide.
(2.) The writ petitioner who was a lecturer of Statistics in the Assam Vaterinary College was permanently absorbed as an employee of the Assam Agricultural University, Jorhat as per section 47 of the Assam Agricultural University Act, 1968. He was serving as Assistant Professor of the University, which post was upgraded as Associate Professor and since January, 1979 he has been serving under the University as Associate Professor. For sometime he was holding the Dost of Deputy Registrar of the University. A synopsis of research problem of Ph. D Degree was prepared by the petitioner under the guidance of Dr. P.C. Goswami, respondent No. 5, a renouned economist as well as known academician of the country, who is also a Professor of Gauhati University and a recognised guide of Assam Agricultural University and the said synopsis was submitted to the University on 24.10.84. The relevant part of the methodology of the research problem has been quoted in the writ petition (para 7). According to petitioner as there was a column of co-guide (if any) in the application form for registration, Dr. P.K. Sarma, respondent No. 6, who received the application gave his name as co-guide although neither the petitioner approach him or suggested his name. The writ petitioner was informed on 19th December, 1985 that the Ph. D Committee permitted him to enroll provisionally as Ph. D candidate of the University. Thereafter, the said Ph. D Committee in its meeting held on 5.9.88 recommended the name of the petitioner along with other candidates for final registration and on 2.5.86 the same was approved by the Academic Council of the University.
(3.) It is not disputed that while giving final approval, the Academic Council in the above meeting specifically directed that it was not necessary for Dr. P.K. Sarma, the co-guide for guiding candidates including the writ petitioner, as due to his retirement on 9.10.85 his services would not be available. The approval of the Academic Council for final registration of the petitioner was duly notified on 11.8.86 and the said notification is available at Annexure B to the writ petition. Petitioner prayed for extension of time which was recommended by his guide Dr. P.C. Goswami. After completion of his work under the guidance of Dr. Goswami, respondent No. 5, the thesis was prepared which was duly certified by the guide Dr. P.C. Goswami for submission. However, before submission of the thesis the petitioner made an application on 20.3.89 to Director, Post Graduate Studies, respondent No. 4, requesting him for necessary instruction as to whether the thesis could be submitted only with the certificate of Dr. P.C. Goswami. Photo copy of the application is at Annexure D and from the note of respondent No. 4 and orders of the Vice-Chancellor, respondent No. 2, it appears that writ petitioner was allowed to submit his thesis only with the certificate granted by his guide Dr. P.C. Goswami. According to petitioner two examiners were approved by the Vice Chancellor out of five recommended by the guide Dr. P.C. Goswami. The said two examiners approved the thesis, but no viva-voce examination has been held as required under the relevant Regulation. Suddenly, Dr. P.K. Sarma, respondent No. 6 raised objection for submitting the thesis without his signature and the Academic Council discussed this matter on 5.5.89. According to petitioner, the Academic Council ignored/omitted to consider the actual facts and the relevant Regulation of the University and also the fact that name of Dr. PK Sarma was deleted as co-guide. Thereafter, in the meeting held on 27.11.89, by the impugned resolution, the petitioner was directed to re-submit his thesis through Dr. P.K. Sarma by amending the earlier resolution of the Academic Council dated 2.5.86. Being aggrieved, the present petition has been filed.;