Disposed

Partha Pratim Saikia v. the Gauhati University and 5 Ors.

Gauhati HC14 Jun 2019WP(C)/3589/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Gauhati High Court disposed of a writ petition where a petitioner was declared a dis-collegiate due to low attendance. The court directed the college authorities to consider the pending representation made by the petitioner, noting discrepancies in attendance concessions granted to other students, and to decide the matter before the upcoming LL.B. examinations. The petition itself was disposed

What did the court decide?

The petitioner shall submit the order before the Principal by 17.06.2019; the Principal must dispose of the representation dated 03.05.2018 with a reasoned order on or before 1st half of 20.06.2019 by

Partha Pratim Saikia Vs the Gauhati University and… — Education and Admissions | Gauhati HC (2019)

¶1

Page No.# 1/5

¶2

GAHC010122262019

¶3

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶4

Case No. : WP(C) 3589/2019

¶5

1:PARTHA PRATIM SAIKIA

¶6

SON OF DHANI RAM SAIKIA, RESIDENT OF UZAN BAZAR PADUM PUKHURI, P.O- UZAN BAZAR, P.S- LATASIL, DISTRICT OF KAMRUP(METRO), ASSAM.

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

1:THE GAUHATI UNIVERSITY AND 5 ORS.

¶9

REPRESENTED BY THE VICE- CHANCELLOR, GAUHATI UNIVERSITY, GOPINATH BORDOLOI NAGAR, GUWAHATI- 781014.

¶10

2:THE VICE-CHANCELLOR GAUHATI UNIVERSITY GOPINATH BORDOLOI NAGAR GUWAHATI- 781014.

¶11

3:THE REGISTRAR GAUHATI UNIVERSITY GOPINATH BORDOLOI NAGAR GUWAHATI- 781014.

¶12

4:THE CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATIONS GAUHATI UNIVERSITY GOPINATH BORDOLOI NAGAR GUWAHATI- 781014.

¶13

5:B.R.M. GOVT. LAW COLLEGE PUNJABARI GUWAHATI- 781037 REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL.

¶14

6:THE PRINCIPAL B.R.M. GOVT. LAW COLLEGE PUNJABARI GUWAHATI- 781037

¶15

Page No.# 2/5

¶16

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. B D GOSWAMI Advocate for the Respondent : SC, G U

¶17

BEFORE

¶18

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MANASH RANJAN PATHAK

¶19

ORDER

¶20

14-06-2019

¶21

Heard Mr. B. D. Goswami, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. P. Barman, learned Standing counsel, Gauhati University for the respondent Nos. 1 to 4 and Mr. K. Gogoi, learned Standing counsel, Higher Education Department for the respondent Nos. 5 and 6.

¶22

Petitioner took admission for 3 years LL.B. course in Bishnu Ram Medhi (BRM) Government Law College, Guwahati in the year 2017 and for that purpose he has already completed his LL.B. 1^st to 3^rd Semester course and appeared in the relevant Examinations from the said College. According to the petitioner, the Sessions for said 4^th Semester LL.B. course started in January, 2019 and ended in May, 2019 and the Examination for said 4^th Semester LL.B. course will commence from 21.06.2019.

¶23

According to the petitioner as he suffered from Hepatitis, he could not attend the 4^th Semester LL.B. classes between 26 to 28 February, 2019 and on 1, 2, 5, 6, 8, 11, 12, 13, 15, 16, 18, 19, 21, 22 and 23^rd of March, 2019 as well as from 1^st to 3^rd April, 2019. The petitioner on 03.05.2019 approached the Principal of said BRM Govt. Law College, submitted a representation along with a medical certificate dated 03.05.2019 issued by one Dr. J. Sarma so as to place the reason for not attending his classes of LL.B. 4^th Semester during the aforesaid period. By his said representation dated 03.05.2019 the petitioner submitted before the Principal of BRM Govt. Law College to grant him leave during the said period.

¶24

Though the petitioner deposited necessary fees with the Gauhati University so as to appear in the ensuing LL.B. 4^th Semester Examination to be held from 21.06.2019 but the respondent college authority did not accept centre fees from the petitioner debarring him from appearing in the said Examination, declaring him to be a dis-collegiate due to his lower

¶25

Page No.# 3/5

¶26

attendance in his class.

¶27

Being aggrieved with the said action of the respondent Law College, the petitioner has preferred this writ petition.

¶28

In the affidavit filed by the Principal of BRM Govt. Law College it is stated that the petitioner though stated to have suffered from Hepatitis and sought for leave during the period from 26.02.2019 to 02.04.2019 but the Attendance Register of the said class of the College goes to show that the petitioner attended his classes on 7^th , 12^th , 15^th , 16^th , 20^th , 21^st and 23^rd March of 2019 as well as on 4^th and 5^th April, 2019 the same goes to show that the petitioner did not suffer from any medical disease preventing him from attending the college during the said period. As he did not furnish any medical prescription, test report and proof of undergoing any such treatment except the medical certificate on 03.05.2019 with his application dated 03.05.2019 the respondent No.6 submitted that the said act on the part of the petitioner appears to be an afterthought and a manufactured plea to overcome his shortfall of attendance in the relevant Semester.

¶29

In the said affidavit the Law College authority also clarified that the petitioner had only 37.26% of attendance in his 4^th Semester in the college and as that, the list of dis-collegiate students of the college was published on 21.05.2019 itself, where the name of the petitioner figured.

¶30

In the said affidavit, the Law College authority has also clarified that the Gauhati University prescribed a minimum percentage of 75% which can be relaxed upto 65% in special cases and that the Bar Council of India Rules of Legal Education prescribed minimum of 70% of attendance which can be relaxed upto 65% in exceptional cases, whereas petitioner’s attendance in his 4^th Semester is only 37.26% which cannot be considered.

¶31

The petitioner filed his reply affidavit to the affidavit of the BRM Govt. Law College, respondent Nos. 5 and 6 stating that the authority of said College allowed the students of 5^th year LL.B. 10^th Semester Classes to appear in the ensuing examination having lesser attendance percentage and to that extent in the said affidavit the petitioner has placed that the candidates with Roll Nos. 5, 12, 35 and 36 of 5^th year LL.B. 10^th Semester in said College

¶32

Page No.# 4/5

¶33

had their attendance below 40%, whereas students with Roll Nos. 1, 21, 28, 29, 33, 34 had their attendance of 45%, 41%, 37%, 39%, 33% and 39% respectively and in spite of having such lower percentage of attendance, the authority of the respondent Law College accepted their application and did not declare them as dis-collegiate. As such it is urged by the petitioner that the act of the respondent Law College declaring him to be dis-collegiate due to his lower percentage of attendance in the 4^th Semester LL.B. Course is totally discriminatory in nature.

¶34

Petitioner submitted that the respondent University have already received his examination fess for the said 4^th Semester 3 year LL.B. course that is scheduled from 21.06.2019, but the respondents Law College refused to receive his centre fees for the said Examination.

¶35

Mr. Gogoi, learned Standing counsel, Higher Education Department by placing reliance on the judgment of this Court in the case of Rajib Borgohain Vs. Cotton College and others reported in 1998 (1) GLT 470, as well as the judgments of Delhi High Court in the case of Satyendra Singh Vs. University of Delhi and another reported in 2008 Legal Eagle 556 and Ankita Meena Vs. University of Delhi, that was decided on 15.05.2018 in WP(C) No.5194/2018 submitted that no such relaxation pertaining to the attendance can be given to the students of the professional course including the LL.B. Course.

¶36

Mr. Gogoi, further placed that a student has a duty to attend classes as prescribed and without doing so he cannot make a tall claim to be sent up for examination and if that is allowed that will be a body blow to the system and procedure where, the whole edifice will collapse and that the hard facts cannot make hard laws.

¶37

From the said judgment this Court in Rajib Borgohai (supra) Mr. Gogoi, further placed that relief can be granted when the decision can be justified on principle and precept, which must be tested on the anvil of being just and it must be a decision according to the ‘Rule of Law’ and not according to length of the foot of the Court. Mr. Gogoi further submitted that relief can be moulded by the Court in a writ jurisdiction to uphold the cause of justice and it cannot be toyed with according whims and fancy of an individual.

¶38

We have considered the submissions of the learned counsels for the parties and have

¶39

Page No.# 5/5

¶40

seen that representation dated 03.05.2019 of the petitioner is yet to be attended by the Principal of BRM Govt. Law College, respondent No.6.

¶41

Considering the above, this writ petition is disposed of directing the authorities of BRM Govt. Law College, respondent Nos. 5 and 6 to dispose of the representation of the petitioner dated 03.05.2018 with a reasoned order in accordance with law after considering his attendance from January, 2019 to May, 2019 excluding the days when he alleged to have been suffering from Hepatitis considering the concession that was given by the authority of said Law College to its other students specified by the petitioner in his affidavit-in-reply filed against the affidavit of the respondent Nos. 5 and 6 who are also the students of the same Law College having lower percentage of attendance like 33%, 35%, 37%, 39%, 40%, 41% and 45% for the 5^th year LL.B. 10^th Semester Examination.

¶42

Petitioner shall submit a certified copy of this order along with a copy of this writ petition including the Annexures appended thereto as well as his affidavit-in-reply filed in the case today i.e. on 14.06.2019, before the Principal of BRM Government Law College, Guwahati by 17.06.2019, obtaining necessary acknowledgement in that regard.

¶43

In the event of such approach by the petitioner before the respondent Nos.5 and 6, Principal of BRM Government Law College, Guwahati within the said specified time, he shall dispose of the same on or before the first half of 20.06.2019, intimating the petitioner about the result of his said representation, keeping in mind that 4^th Semester 3 years LL.B. course Examination under Gauhati University is scheduled from 21.06.2019.

¶44

With the above observation and direction, this writ petition stands disposed of.

¶45

JUDGE

¶46

Comparing Assistant

Partha Pratim Saikia v. the Gauhati University and 5 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Partha Pratim Saikia v. the Gauhati University and 5 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nirmal Sinha Vs the Additional Director

Amitabha Goswami and Anr. Vs Sonamoni Das and Anr.

Rajashree Nunisa and Anr. Vs Sonamoni Das and Anr.

Bidyapati Singha Vs the State of Assam and 2 Ors.

Rangmala Roy Nath Vs Shamsher Singh and 2 Ors.

Smti Premada Devi Vs the State of Assam and 8 Ors.