One-Year LLM Program Approved By UGC, Valid For Getting Appointment In Public Departments Or Universities: Madras High Court
3 Apr 2025 7:15 PM
The Madras High Court recently observed that that the one-year LLM programme was approved by the UGC and could not be held to be invalid for getting appointed into public departments or Universities. The court thus asked the Teachers Recruitment Board to include the name of a woman whose name was withheld merely because she had done a one-year LLM course.
Justice RN Manjula observed that the notification for appointment did not prescribe that one of the requirements for the appointment was only a two-year LLM degree. The court observed that while the employer could demand the educational requirement for a post, the qualification contemplated could not be arbitrary and bring in discrimination between similar courses.
“Even though the employer is a rightful person who should demand the educational requirement for a post to be filled up in this regard, the qualification contemplated by the employer shall not make any arbitrary discrimination between equivalent and similar course without any valid basis,” the court said.
The court was hearing a petition was filed by Sangeetha Sriraam challenging the provisional selection list of candidates published by the Teachers Recruitment Board and to direct the Board to appoint her to the post of Assistant Professor against the vacancy in Human Rights Department.
The petitioner informed the court that she had applied to the post of “Assistant Professor” (Human Rights) when the notification was issued by the Board. She submitted that she had attended the written examination and topped it by obtaining 133 marks out of 175 and got a call letter from the Board for attending the interview. Following this she attended the interview. However, when the provisional selection of candidates was published, her name was not on the list and the candidates who had obtained lesser marks than the petitioner found place in the selection list.
The petitioner argued that even if the other candidates had obtained full marks, she could not have been excluded from the selection list. She also submitted that if her interview marks were clubbed with her written examination mark, she would be ahead of the selected candidates.
Opposing the plea, the State argued that the petitioner's candidature could not be considered as she had qualified in LLM degree by doing one year LLM Programme while the degree required for appointment was two year LLM Programme.
The court, however, noted that the above requirement was informed to the petitioner only through the counter and not anytime before. The court also noted that as per the rules in the notification, the requirement regarding Master's Degree was 55% of mark or an equivalent grade in the point scale wherever the grade system is followed in a concerned/relevant/allied subject from an Indian University or an equivalent degree from an accredited foreign University. The court thus noted that the notification did not specify the two-year LLM requirements.
The court noted that through an earlier order, the court had held that one one-year LLM programme recognised by the UGC was accepted for the purpose of admission to PHD. The court added that when the same was allowed, there was no reason to reject the one-year LLM degree for the purpose of appointment.
“As stated already one year LLM Programme has been approved by UGC and that has been accepted as qualification to get enrolled in Ph.D. programme in Tamil Nadu Dr.Ambedkar Law University itself. It is needless to state that the University in which the petitioner had done her one year LLM course is one of the most reputed Law School in the country and it is needless to state that one year LLM course would have also included the research aspect as well. Under such circumstances, no invalidation can be attached to one year LLM degree for the purpose of getting appointment in the public departments or Universities,” the court said.
Thus, noting that the petitioner had proved her eligibility by securing first rank in written examination and that the authorities ought to have considered her candidature, the court directed the Board to include her name in the selection list and to release her appointment order.
Counsel for Petitioner: Mr. M. Nirmalkumar
Counsel for Respondents: Mr. R. Neelakandan Additional Advocate General Assisted by Mr. R. Siddharath Standing Counsel for TRB, Mr. V. Umakanth, Mr. P. R. Gopinathan
Case Title: Dr. Sangeetha Sriraam v. The Teachers Recruitment Board and Others
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 128
Case No: W.P.No.15473 of 2019
No comments:
Post a Comment