1. This Writ Petition is filed by the petitioner seeking the following relief:

               “to issue a writ, order or direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus, declaring the action of respondent Nos.2 to 4 through respondent No.5 vide Letter F.No.IG/SRL/RegnIII/2023/8069, dated 20.04.2023, in withdrawing the readmission facility through Form-3 for the students of Management Programme (MP) admitted in January, 2018, and not considering the petitioner's request to allow readmission to the Management Programme (MP) Course by permitting the petitioner to appear for the missing MS-91 paper, instead directing the petitioner to pursue the new MBA Course for all four semesters, as illegal, arbitrary, unjust, violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India, contrary to the principles of natural justice and unreasonable, and consequently direct the respondents Nos.2 to 5 to allow the petitioner to appear only in the missing MS-91 paper by accepting his Form-3 application for readmission as per the rules in force at the time of his admission in January, 2018, and grant his Management Programme Degree on successful completion of MS-91 paper, and pass such other order or orders as this Court may deem fit and proper.”

02. Heard Sri Jonathan Ivan Rajan, learned counsel, representing Sri Mohd. Azhar, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Sri Annapurna Sreeram, learned Standing Counsel appearing for Indira Gandhi National Open University (IGNOU), for respondent Nos.2 to 5, and perused the material available on record.

03. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was admitted into the Management Programme (MP/MBA), hereinafter referred to as the “Old Course”, offered by the second respondent–Indira Gandhi National Open University (IGNOU), in January, 2018, bearing Enrolment No.183819933 MP. The petitioner was allotted Aurora’s Business School, Punjagutta, Hyderabad, as his Study Centre and the fourth respondent was the concerned Regional Centre. It is submitted that the petitioner pursued the said course and appeared for the examinations in respect of his coursework from December, 2019 onwards and appeared for his last semester examination in December, 2021. Thereafter, when the petitioner checked his Grade Card in March, 2022, the same reflected that he had successfully completed the papers for the fourth semester. Therefore, the petitioner bona fide believed that he had completed all the academic requirements of the course and was eligible for issuance of the Degree Certificate by the second respondent-University.

04. Learned counsel further submits that, despite completion of the course, the petitioner did not receive his Degree Certificate even after waiting for about six months, i.e., till June, 2022. During the said period, the petitioner made repeated attempts to contact the officials of the IGNOU Head Office and the concerned Study Centre through the contact numbers available on the University's portal. It is submitted that, on certain occasions, the petitioner was informed that, owing to the COVID-19 pandemic and shortage of staff, there was delay in issuance of the Degree Certificate and that the same would be issued shortly.

05. It is further submitted that, as the Degree Certificate was not received even by the end of December, 2022, the petitioner submitted a grievance through the IGNOU Grievance Redressal and Management (iGRAM) portal on 21.12.2022 at 9:35 A.M., bearing Grievance Submission Token No.011222311414260. The petitioner also addressed emails to the IGNOU Head Office on 21.12.2022, 30.12.2022 and 11.01.2023, requesting issuance of his Final Grade Card and Degree Certificate. However, except for automated responses, no substantive reply was furnished to the petitioner informing him about the status of his course or the further steps required to be taken by him.

06. Learned counsel further submits that, only on 25.04.2023, the petitioner received the first formal communication from the second respondent-University through the fifth respondent, vide F.No.IG/SRD/Reg-III/2023/8069, wherein it was stated that the readmission facility had been withdrawn with effect from July, 2021, consequent upon revision of the Management Programme, and that the students were required to take admission into the new Programme and complete all four semesters afresh.

07. It is contended by the learned counsel that the aforesaid stand of the respondents cannot be applied to the petitioner, since he was admitted to the Old Course in January, 2018, had pursued the said course and appeared for the requisite examinations and, as reflected in the Grade Card, had completed the requisite papers, except MS-91. Therefore, according to the learned counsel, the subsequent revision of the Management Programme and withdrawal of the readmission facility ought not to deprive the petitioner of an opportunity to complete the only remaining paper.

08. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner is not seeking any relaxation in the academic requirements. His grievance is that he should be permitted to complete the MS-91 paper, which alone remains to be completed, instead of being compelled to undergo the revised Management Programme afresh. However, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was not aware of the requirement of appearing for MS-91 paper for completion of the Management Programme. He, therefore, requests this Court to direct the respondents to consider the representation submitted by the petitioner on 03.04.2023, seeking readmission into the Management Programme, and permit him to complete the said Programme by appearing for the MS-91 paper along with the students of the 2019 and 2020 batches, in terms of the policy contained in the Notifications dated 14.02.2023 and 31.10.2023.

09. On the other hand, learned Standing Counsel appearing for IGNOU, while referring to the counter-affidavit, submits that the petitioner was admitted into the Management Programme in January, 2018, bearing Enrolment No.183819933, and that the validity of his admission was only up to December, 2022. It is submitted that the petitioner had completed all the courses under the said Programme except MS-91.

10. It is further submitted that the University had withdrawn the facility of re-admission and prescribed the maximum duration for completion of the Programme vide Notification No.IG/SRD/2/2020, dated 06.10.2020, issued by the Registrar, Student Registration Division. Therefore, upon expiry of the validity period of the petitioner's registration in December, 2022, the petitioner could not seek re-admission under the erstwhile scheme.

11. Learned Standing Counsel further submits that the policies and notifications issued by the University from time to time are framed with the approval of the competent statutory bodies of the University and are placed in the public domain on the University website. The said notifications are also communicated to all the Regional Centres with appropriate directions for necessary action. It is therefore submitted that the withdrawal of the re-admission scheme was duly notified on the University and Regional Centre websites.

12. It is further submitted that, in order to facilitate the students who could not complete their respective degrees within the maximum validity period of their earlier registration, the University introduced a Credit Transfer Scheme vide Notification No.IGNOU/SRD/SOMS/R-IV/2023/1062, dated 14.02.2023. Under the said scheme, students of the pre-revised Management Programme who could not complete the Programme within the maximum validity period were permitted to take fresh admission into the revised Management Programme and seek internal credit transfer of the courses already completed under their previous enrolment, so as to enable them to complete the revised Programme within the prescribed period.

13. It is also submitted that, subsequently, for the benefit of such students, the University issued Notification No.IGNOU/SRD/SOMS/R-III/2023/3220, dated 31.10.2023, in partial modification of the earlier Notification dated 14.02.2023. Under the modified scheme, in addition to internal credit transfer from the pre-revised Programme to the revised Management Programme, the facility of change of course was also permitted, so that the students could complete the Programme within the minimum possible duration.

14. Learned Standing Counsel further submits that, when the petitioner approached the officials of the IGNOU Regional Centre, Hyderabad, he was duly apprised of the change in the University's policy and was advised to take fresh admission in the revised MBA Programme and avail the facility of credit transfer and change of course in accordance with the University's rules. It was also informed to the petitioner that, since only one course, namely MS-91, remained to be completed, he could complete the degree within one semester, i.e., six months, by taking fresh admission and availing the aforesaid facilities.

15. Learned Standing Counsel further submits that, pursuant to the interim order dated 22.04.2024, this Court had directed the fourth respondent to receive the examination fee from the petitioner to enable him to appear for the MS-91 examination scheduled to be held on 19.06.2024. In compliance with the said interim order, the IGNOU Regional Centre, Hyderabad, communicated with the petitioner through email and forwarded a soft copy of the Term-End Examination Form, requesting him to submit the same without late fee.

16. However, upon verification of the petitioner's registration particulars, it was found that the petitioner had neither opted for nor registered for the MS-91 course during the validity period of his registration. Therefore, according to the learned Standing Counsel, the petitioner could not be permitted to appear for the Term-End Examination in a course for which he had not registered during the validity of his enrolment.

17. Learned Standing Counsel therefore submits that, having failed to register or opt for MS-91 within the validity period of his original enrolment, the petitioner cannot claim a right to appear for the said examination under the lapsed enrolment. It is submitted that the petitioner has to avail the remedial mechanism provided by the University, namely, fresh admission under the applicable revised Programme and the benefit of internal credit transfer/change of course in accordance with the notifications issued by the University.

18. Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for IGNOU and having perused the material available on record, it is not in dispute that the petitioner was admitted to the Management Programme in January, 2018 and that his registration was valid up to December, 2022. It is also the specific case of the respondents that the petitioner has completed all the courses except MS-91. The principal issue that arises for consideration is whether, in the light of the subsequent Notifications dated 14.02.2023 and 31.10.2023, the petitioner is entitled to avail the benefit of the mechanism provided by the University for students of the pre-revised Management Programme who could not complete the Programme within the maximum validity period.

19. It is evident from the material placed before this Court that the University itself introduced a mechanism, subsequent to withdrawal of the re-admission facility, to enable students who could not complete the pre-revised Management Programme within the maximum validity period to pursue the revised Programme by availing the benefit of internal credit transfer. The subsequent Notification dated 31.10.2023 further modified the earlier scheme by permitting change of course also. In the circumstances, and having regard to the fact that the petitioner claims to have completed all the courses except MS-91, this Court is of the view that the petitioner's request requires consideration by the competent authority of the University in the light of the aforesaid notifications. Therefore, this Court considers it appropriate to direct the competent authority of the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 03.04.2023, in the light of the University's policy Notifications dated 14.02.2023 and 31.10.2023. Accordingly, the respondents are directed to consider the representation dated 03.04.2023 submitted by the petitioner, in accordance with the Notifications dated 14.02.2023 and 31.10.2023, within a period of two (2) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

20. Accordingly, with the above directions, this Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, if any, pending shall stand closed.