Disposed

Mandhir Bajaj v. Vice Chancellor and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC9 Oct 2012CWP/20211/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought promotion in LL.B. despite missing semesters due to college affiliation delay. Court found no case for immediate writ intervention but directed Vice Chancellor to consider representation within 20 days per university regulations.

What did the court decide?

Vice Chancellor directed to consider petitioner's representation and pass speaking orders within 20 days in accordance with University Regulations.

Mandhir Bajaj Vs Vice Chancellor and Ors. — Education and Admissions | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

CWP No. 20211 of 2012

¶2

-1-

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA, CHANDIGARH

¶4

CWP No. 20211 of 2012 Date of Decision: 09.10.2012

¶5

Mandhir Bajaj ...... Petitioner Versus Vice Chancellor & another ...... Respondents

¶6

CORUM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.P. NAGRATH

¶7

Present:Mr. Aman Dhir, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶8

R.P. NAGRATH, J. (ORAL)

¶9

The petitioner got admission in LL.B Course in Rayat College of Law of Rayat and Bahara Institutes. He got admission in the 2008-2009 Session. He did not appear in the 1^st and 2^nd semester and for the next year the said college was not granted affiliation by the Panjab University. Therefore, he filed CWP No. 21611 of 2011 and an order was passed on 22.11.2011, directing the Vice Chancellor of the University to consider his representation and pass appropriate order strictly in accordance with the University Regulations, and he was granted admission by the Panjab University in the 2^nd year. The petitioner is not being promoted to the 3^rd year of the LL.B for the 5^th semester because he could not qualify required 50% papers of 3^rd and 4^th

¶10

CWP No. 20211 of 2012 -2-

¶11

semesters, though he has qualified the papers for the 1^st and 2^nd semesters. Due to late admission, it is stated that the petitioner could qualify in 5 out of 16 papers of the 3^rd and 4^th semesters.

¶12

The petitioner's counsel has relied upon a decision of the University Syndicate dated 06.07.2009 that the students who could not qualify 50% of the papers for no fault of theirs, be given necessary concession. It is submitted that the same concession should be applicable to the petitioner as he could get admission only 2 months prior to the end of the Session. The petitioner in this regard has also submitted representation (Annexure P-4) to Head of the Department, but no decision has been taken thereon till today.

¶13

From the above facts, no case to interfere by this Court in exercise of its writ jurisdiction is made out. However, Vice Chancellor of the University is directed to consider the representation (Annexure P-4) filed by the petitioner and pass appropriate speaking orders strictly in accordance with the University Regulations and its decision, within a period of 20 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

¶14

If the petitioner also submits a copy of this petition before the University Authority, the same shall also be treated as part of his representation.

¶15

Disposed of.

¶16

October 09, 2012 ( R.P. NAGRATH ) jk JUDGE

Mandhir Bajaj v. Vice Chancellor and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mandhir Bajaj v. Vice Chancellor and Ors.

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

Jia Lal Vs State of Haryana & Ors.

Manjit Singh Vs Hy.St.and Ors.

Jaspal Kaur Vs State of Punjab

Kailash Rani Vs State of Punjab

Chander Pal Vs State of Haryana and Oths

Bhubnehswar Singh Vs State of Punjab & Ors.