Dismissed

Prachi Tulsyan v. State of Chhattisgarh

Chhattisgarh HC13 Jul 2021WA/100/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Chhattisgarh dismissed an appeal against the cancellation of the Common Entrance Test for PG Horticulture by Indira Gandhi Krishi Vishwavidyalaya. Upholding the Single Judge's order, the bench held that the admission process could not be canceled at that stage due to filled seats and the campus curriculum starting, citing the need for flexibility during the COVID-19 pandemic.

What did the court decide?

The writ appeal was dismissed, leaving the parties to bear their own costs.

Prachi Tulsyan Vs State of Chhattisgarh — Education and Admissions | Chhattisgarh HC (2021)

WA No. 100 of 2021

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶5

(Arising out of order dated 05.11.2020 passed by learned Single Judge in WPC No.2240 of 2020)

¶6

WA No. 100 of 2021

¶7

Prachi Tulsyan D/o. Niranjan Tulsyan Aged About 22 Years R/o.- Village Belgahna District Bilaspur (Chhattisgarh)

¶8

---- Appellant

¶9

Versus

¶10

State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary Department Of Agriculture Mantralay Mahanadi Bhawan P.S. Rakhi, New Raipur District Raipur (Chhattisgarh)

¶11

Vice Chancellor Indira Gandhi Krishi Vishwavidyalaya Krishak Nagar Raipur (Chhattisgarh)

¶12

Director Of Instruction And Controller Of Exam Of Indira Gandhi Krishi Vishwavidyalaya Raipur (Chhattisgarh)

¶13

Indira Gandhi Krishi Vishwavidyalaya Through Registrar Krishak Nagar, Raipur (Chhattisgarh)

¶14

University Grants Commission Through Secretary, Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg New Delhi (Delhi)

¶15

---- Respondents

¶16

For Appellant :- Mr. P.K. Tulsyan, Advocate For Respondent-State :- Mr. Arjit Tiwari, PL For Respondents No.2-4:Mr. Sangharsh Pandey, Advocate For Respondent No.5 :- Mr. R.K. Gupta, Advocate

¶17

Proceedings through Video Conferencing

¶18

Hon'ble Shri Prashant Kumar Mishra, Ag.CJ Hon'ble Smt Rajani Dubey, J Judgment On Board

¶19

¶20

Prashant Kumar Mishra, Ag.CJ

WA No. 100 of 2021

13/07/2021

Appellant (henceforth 'the petitioner') has passed her B.Sc Horticulture in the year 2019 and was preparing for Common Entrance Test (CET) for getting admitted to Post Graduate Horticulture course, however, as to her utter surprise, the respondents vide order dated 30.7.2020 (Annexure P1 to writ petition), canceled the examination and decided to provide admission for PG & Ph.D courses on the basis of marks/percentage secured by a candidate in the eligibility qualification, which in the instant case is B.Sc Agriculture/ Horticulture course.

¶25

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that by the action of the respondents, the petitioner has lost one precious year in her academic career and further that the Supreme Court has directed that final year examination cannot be canceled.

¶26

In a detailed order, learned Single Judge has assigned reasons as to why petitioner's contention has not found favour with the Court.

¶27

Admittedly, the academic session has already commenced after July, 2020 and all the seats for the subject course for which the petitioner was aspiring have already been filled. The entire admission process cannot be canceled at this stage. Similarly, if seats are not available, examination cannot be held now for the petitioner alone.

¶28

It has been noted by learned Single Judge that considering

¶29

¶30

WA No. 100 of 2021

¶31

the scenario arising out of COVID-19 pandemic situation, the University was facing difficulty in making admissions as per the extant policy, therefore, it has acted under the ICAR (Indian Council of Agricultural Research) suggestions which had enabled the University to adopt alternative modes for admission process. It is matter of common knowledge that since 25 March, 2020 onwards COVID-19 situation was so grave that the academic programmes including admission process in various educational institutions has been greatly disturbed, therefore, in such a situation, when academic institutions have taken decision depending upon all relevant factors, it cannot be found fault only because the petitioner had taken a drop and was preparing for entrance examination. Law does not work for or against one person in such matters more so during COVID-19 situation.

¶32

Considering the entire subject matter at hand, we are not inclined to interfere with the order passed by learned Single Judge.

¶33

In view of the above, the writ appeal is liable to be and is hereby dismissed, leaving the parties to bear their own cost(s).

¶34

SD/SD/( Prashant Kumar Mishra ) ( Rajani Dubey ) Acting Chief Justice Judge

¶35

Ayushi

Prachi Tulsyan v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prachi Tulsyan v. State of Chhattisgarh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dr. Vinay Gupta Vs Registrar Public Trust / Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue)

Anand Thakur Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Jaishankar Ram Vs State of Chhattisgarh

M/S Symphony Infrastructure (I) Private Limited Vs State of Chhattisgarh

Radhe Shyam Saraf Vs Smt. Vidya Devi Saraf

Unnat Matasya Sahkari Samiti Maryadit Kamalpur Vs State of Chhattisgarh