Petitioner sought admission in a Bachelor of Journalism course, relying on delayed Class 12 results from NIOS. The Court held that universities are entitled to strict enforcement of cut-off dates and that exceptions would undermine the scheme, dismissing the petition.
Petitioner's writ petition and application were dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~27
ANUSHKA SAIGAL ..... Petitioner
Through Mr.Bharat Bhushan with Mr.Nakul and Rajan, Advocates.
versus
GGSIP UNIVERSITY & ANR ..... Respondents Through Mr.Vaibhav Kalra, Advocate for R-1.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN
Present writ petition has been filed seeking a direction to respondents to consider petitioner’s case by condoning the delay of one week in declaration of Class 12th result by National Institute of Open School (hereinafter referred to as ‘NIOS’), Noida.
It has been averred in the petition that on 25th May, 2015, CBSE declared Class 12th result wherein petitioner got a compartment in Mathematics. In July 2015, the petitioner appeared for compartment examination in Mathematics, but could not qualify the same. In the meanwhile, on June, 2015 petitioner applied for admission in Bachelor of Journalism and Mass Communication (BJMC) Course in respondent No.2-college.
It has been further averred that the petitioner took admission in Class 12th in NIOS in August, 2015 and appeared again in Class 12th examination. On 9th November, 2015 the petitioner was declared successful in the examination conducted by NIOS.
Learned counsel for the petitioner further states that the NIOS where the petitioner was pursuing her 12th class declared her result in November, 2015, i.e., after the cut-off date of the last date of admission. According to him, the petitioner cannot be penalised for the late declaration of the result of NIOS.
In the opinion of this Court, universities are entitled to stipulate a cut-off date for admission and the cut-off date has sanctity in law. The Supreme Court in Priya Gupta Vs. State of Chhattisgarh and Others, (2012) 7 SCC 433 , has held as under:-
“45. The maxim boni judicis est causas litium dirimere places an obligation upon the Court to ensure that it resolves the causes of litigation in the country. Thus, the need of the hour is that binding dicta be prescribed and statutory regulations be enforced, so that all concerned are mandatorily required to implement the time schedule in its true spirit and substance. It is difficult and not even advisable to keep some windows open to meet a particular situation of exception, as it may pose impediments to the smooth implementation of laws and defeat the very object of the scheme. These schedules have been prescribed upon serious consideration by all concerned. They are to be applied stricto sensu and cannot be moulded to suit the convenience of some economic or other interest of any institution, especially, in a manner that is bound to result in compromise of the abovestated principles.”
Consequently, just because NOIS in which petitioner studied has declared its result on 9th November, 2015 would not give the petitioner a right to take admission subsequently. Moreover, if the petitioner’s writ petition is allowed, it would mean that the petitioner on 2nd November, 2015 was simultaneously studying in Class 12th and first year college. In fact, on the cut-off date i.e. 2nd November, 2015, the petitioner had not cleared her Class 12th examination.
Consequently, the present writ petition and the application are
dismissed.
MANMOHAN, J
MAY 18, 2016 KA
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a petitioner can be granted admission to a course after the cut-off date due to the delayed declaration of equivalent examination results.
Whether cut-off dates prescribed by universities possess sanctity in law and must be strictly enforced.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Priya Gupta Vs. State of Chhattisgarh and OthersExplained¶16
Priya Gupta Vs. State of Chhattisgarh and Others, (2012) 7 SCC 433 · Who else cites this
Anushka Saigal
GGSIP University
Manmohan
As recorded by the court registry
A petition under Article 226 of the Constitution asking a High Court to issue a writ against the State or a public authority in a civil matter.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
