Opinion | The Law Is Clear. The University Isn’t Following It

A statute cannot be quietly rewritten through administrative practice or eligibility forms

By Surender Hastir

Begin with the statute. That is how any court would approach the discussion surrounding Panjab University’s Register of Graduates. And once the Panjab University Act, 1947, is read carefully, the issue becomes far simpler than the University’s administrative practice suggests.

At the centre of the matter lies Section 14(4) of the Act. Its language is clear: only those who graduated from the University of the Panjab at Lahore before 1948 are entitled, upon application and compliance with prescribed conditions, to have their names entered in the Register of Graduates of Panjab University.

The historical reason is straightforward. After Partition, the original Panjab University at Lahore became part of Pakistan. The successor institution in India required a legal mechanism to ensure that degrees awarded before the subcontinent’s division would remain valid. Section 14(4) provided that safeguard.

But the safeguard also established a boundary.

Once Lahore fell within Pakistan’s jurisdiction, the University of the Panjab in Lahore began operating under a different country, a different legal system, and a different statutory framework. Lahore Degrees awarded thereafter, in 1948, belong to that system, not to the statutory framework governing Panjab University in India. Parliament therefore drew a deliberate line: recognition for pre-1948 graduates, and nothing beyond.

A Boundary That Cannot Be Moved

That legislative boundary cannot be casually redrawn through administrative practice.

Yet, for several Senate election cycles, Registrar’s eligibility notices and application forms for “Enrolment as a Registered Graduate” have reportedly continued to reference the University of the Panjab, Lahore. In effect, the statutory cut-off embedded in Section 14(4) has been blurred — if not quietly ignored.

From a legal standpoint, the issue is straightforward.

The Panjab University Act is the parent statute. Everything else — the University Calendar, regulations, administrative notices, and application forms — derives authority from it. Under settled legal principles, subordinate rules cannot override or expand the scope of the parent Act.

If an internal rule or administrative form purports to extend eligibility beyond what the statute allows, it is ultra vires — beyond the powers of the authority that issued it.

Shared Responsibility

If this practice were examined by a court or an executive authority, it is difficult to see how it would survive scrutiny. Administrative convenience cannot prevail against the plain words of a statute.

But responsibility here does not lie solely with the University.

The thousands of Registered Graduates — and the Senators elected from among them — must also share part of the blame. For several election cycles, eligibility notices and application forms reportedly continued to reference the University of the Panjab in Lahore. Yet few appear to have asked the obvious question: why was a Pakistani university still appearing in the eligibility framework of an Indian statutory university?

Institutional irregularities often persist not because they are legally defensible, but because they go unquestioned.

Respecting the Statute

Universities rightly insist that their statutes be respected by students, faculty, and administrators alike. The same expectation must apply to the institution itself.

The statute has already drawn the line — the University’s duty is simply to respect it.

The author is an Independent Consultant and the Editorial Creator at CitiTimes.

Note to Readers

This article has been prepared based on information and documents available in the public domain, including official notifications and statutory provisions. It is intended to provide a reasoned analysis of the issue for public understanding. The views expressed do not constitute legal advice, and interpretations are subject to revision should the University or any competent authority issue further clarification.