01Facts
The applicants, who had applied for and appeared in the UGC-NET June 2026 examination in English, asserted that the National Testing Agency’s re-examination delayed declaration of the result until 17 September 2026—after the 31 August 2026 eligibility cut-off for the Assistant Professor (English) recruitment.
¶ 2–4They sought permission to submit applications and have their candidatures considered, or an extension of the cut-off date.
¶ 2–4After arguments, they requested that the Original Application be treated as a representation for the respondents to consider those claims.
¶ 5–6The respondents did not oppose disposal with appropriate directions, without prejudice to their rights and contentions.
¶ 5–602Issues
i.1. Whether the applicants’ claims concerning acceptance of their applications, extension of the eligibility cut-off date, and consideration of their candidatures should be referred to the respondents for decision as a representation.
¶ 5, 8–9ii.2. Whether the selection process for Assistant Professor (English) should continue while that representation remained undecided.
¶ 1103Law Applied
The Tribunal directed that the applicants’ claims be considered under the applicable rules and regulations and the law governing the field, subject to the applicants meeting the requisite eligibility and entitlement and there being no legal impediment.
¶ 9The Tribunal expressly left all questions of fact and law open and made no determination on the merits.
¶ 1204Reasoning
Given the applicants’ limited request and the absence of opposition to disposal with appropriate directions, the Tribunal considered that keeping the Original Application pending would serve no useful purpose.
¶ 6–8It therefore referred the claims to the respondents for a reasoned decision under the applicable law, without deciding whether the applicants were eligible or entitled to the relief sought.
¶ 9, 12To preserve the position pending that decision, it directed that the selection process not proceed in the interim.
¶ 1105Holding
The Original Application was disposed of with a direction to the respondents to treat it, together with its annexed documents, as a representation and decide the applicants’ claims by a detailed, reasoned and speaking order within two weeks of service of a certified copy of the order.
¶ 9–10The respondents were directed not to proceed further with the Assistant Professor (English) selection until the representation was decided.
¶ 11No opinion was expressed on the merits; pending miscellaneous applications were also disposed of, with no order as to costs.
¶ 12–14Original Court PDF
Abdul Rouf MalikvsHIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
![J&K CAT Halts English Assistant Professor Selection Until Officials Decide 3 Candidates’ Plea To Apply After Delayed UGC-NET Result. Abdul Rouf Malik vs HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT. CAT - ['Srinagar']. LawLens](/stories/thumbnails/j-k-cat-halts-english-assistant-professor-selection-until-officials-decide-3-candidates-pl-e4d9df4bfb0c4c1bbb1c0270c2b5fcf3.webp)