Allowed

Sabna Khan v. University of Raj and Ors.

Rajasthan HC8 Sept 2015CW/3758/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed five writ petitions challenging the University of Rajasthan's refusal to declare results for M.Sc. students who lacked 55% graduation marks from outside universities. The Court held that specific delays in University admission verification mechanisms necessitated regularization of admissions and declaration of results, but explicitly limited this decision so it would not cre

What did the court decide?

Results declared and admissions regularized; specific order not to be construed as a binding precedent.

Sabna Khan Vs University of Raj and Ors. — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Rajasthan HC (2015)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR

¶3

O R D E R

¶4

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.4097/2015 (Usha v. University of Raj. & Anr.)

¶5

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.3758/2015 (Sabina Khan v. University of Raj. & Ors.)

¶6

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.4007/2015 (Monika Yadav & Ors. v. University of Raj. & Ors.)

¶7

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.4008/2015 (Sonu Yadav v. University of Raj. & Ors.)

¶8

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.4019/2015 (Pooja & Ors. v. University of Raj. & Ors.) Date of Order: 08/09/2015

¶9

PRESENT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA

¶10

Mr. Alok Chaturvedi, Mr. Jitendra Singh Poonia and Mr. Tanveer Ahmad, for the petitioners.

¶11

Mr. R.A. Katta, for the respondent-University Mr. J.M. Saxena, AAG, for the respondent-State.

¶12

By this common order S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.4097/2015 preferred by Usha, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.3758/2015 instituted by Sabina Khan, S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.4007/2015 preferred by Monika Yadav & Ors., S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.4008/2015 filed by Sonu Yadav and S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.4019/2015 preferred by Pooja & Ors. shall be decided together as the common question involved in the present writ petitions is whether admission of the petitioners in respective affiliated colleges of the Rajasthan University, Jaipur (hereinafter, called University) was as per University norms or not?

¶13

Usha petitioner in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.4097/2015 having passed B.Sc. from Maharishi

¶14

¶15

Dayanand University, Rohtak, took admission in National (P.G.) College for Girls, Alwar in M.Sc. (Previous) in the stream of Chemistry, whereas Sabina Khan petitioner to S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.3758/2015 having completed her Bachelor of Science Course from Rashtrasant Tukadoji Maharaj Nagpur University, obtained admission in M.Sc. (Previous), Bio-Technology, in Biyani Girls College, Sector-3, Vidyadhar Nagar, Jaipur. Monika yadav & Ors. petitioners to S.B. Civil Writ petition No.4007/2015 completed their Bachelor of Science Course from Maharishi Dayanand University, Rohtak. They obtained admission in M.Sc. (Previous), Chemistry in Biyani Girls College, Sector-3, Vidyadhar Nagar, Jaipur. Sonu Yadav petitioner to S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.4008/2015 completed her B.Sc. Course from Maharishi Dayanand University, Rohtak and obtained admission in M.Sc. (Previous), Chemistry in Biyani Girls College, Sector-3, Vidyadhar Nagar, Jaipur. Similarly, Pooja and others petitioners to S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.4019/2015 obtained degree of B.Sc. from Maharishi Dayanand University, Rohtak and obtained admission in M.Sc. (Previous) in Stani Memorial P.G. College, Tagore Marg, Agrawal Farm, Mansarovar, Jaipur.

¶16

Admittedly, none of the petitioners has obtained 55% marks in their graduation.

¶17

Shri R.A. Katta learned counsel appearing for the University has submitted that the University has prescribed that those candidates who have passed graduation from other Universities situated outside the State of Rajasthan should have secured 60% marks

¶18

¶19

in their graduation to obtain admission in postgraduation courses pertaining to science subject. It is also not denied that all candidates/petitioners have obtained their graduation from Universities outside the State of Rajasthan. Petitioners having completed studies of their M.Sc. (Previous) when filled up their examination forms to undertake examination of M.Sc. (Previous), University had raised an objection that since they were not having prescribed marks in the graduation, therefore, their admission in the respective colleges affiliated to the University cannot be approved. Petitioners approached this court. Various coordinate Benches of this court had granted interim relief to the petitioners and permitted them to undertake examination of M.Sc. (Previous) in various science streams. It will be pertinent to note that examinations were scheduled to commence w.e.f. 27.3.2015 and petitioners approached this court on the eve of examination. One of the interim order passed by the coordinate Bench on 30.3.2015 in the case of Monika Yadav & Ors. (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.4007/2015) to illustrate the case of the petitioners is reproduced as under:-

¶20

“ Issue notice to respondents.

¶21

Learned counsel for the petitioners may supply copy of writ petition to Mr. R.A. Katta, learned counsel, who has appeared on behalf of the respondents in identical writ petition.

¶22

Counsel for the petitioners submits that M.Sc. (Previous) Chemistry Examination-2015 commenced from 27.03.2015 and the petitioners could not appear in first paper of the aforesaid examination held on 27.03.2015. It is submitted that the petitioners were admitted to the respondent-college at the commencement of the academic year and studied whole year in the said college and at the

¶23

¶24

last stage, the petitioners are being illegally deprived of permission letter to write the remaining examination in issue.

¶25

Having heard the counsel for the petitioners and looking to the fact that since first paper of the petitioners has already taken place, respondent-University is directed to provisionally permit the petitioners to appear in the remaining papers of M.Sc.(Previous) Chemistry Examination2015 from tomorrow, i.e., 31.03.2015 and any other date as per the time table subject to the outcome of the writ petition. Result of the examination shall, however, not be declared save with permission of this Court. It goes without saying that the interim order will not create any equity in favour of the petitioners to be reckoned with at the time of final disposal of the writ petition.

¶26

Connect with S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3758/2015.”

¶27

It is not denied that all candidates have undertaken the examination of M.Sc. (Previous) and their results have been withheld by the University because of the objection raised by University which has been already noted above.

¶28

To the dismay of this court, it has been pointed out by the learned counsel for the University that the University has no inbuilt mechanism to regulate the admission of the candidates of the affiliated colleges. Once the college affiliated to the University grants admission, it is for the University to approve the admission within the reasonable period. Shri Katta appearing for the University has very fairly stated that the University is faced with this practical difficulty and eligibility of the candidate, at present is considered, only when the examination forms are scanned at the end of academic year, at the time of issuing role numbers.

¶29

This court after hearing counsel for the University is of the view that remedial measures are

¶30

¶31

required to be adopted by the University to safeguard the interest of the students. Once affiliated college grants admission, the University must evolve a mechanism that within two months the eligibility of the candidate who has been admitted is examined by the University and the candidate is informed whether his or her admission has been regularized by the University or not. Since due to lapse of the University, there being no mechanism to approve the admission made by the affiliated colleges, within reasonable period the candidates cannot be permitted to suffer especially when they have gone ahead in their life and have completed one year of their studies.

¶32

In peculiar facts and circumstances of these cases, it is ordered that result of the petitioners shall be declared and their admission to the University shall stand regularized, however the order passed in these petitions in view of peculiar facts and circumstances shall not be construed precedent binding.

¶33

In view of above, present writ petitions are allowed.

¶34

Consequent upon disposal of the main petitions, the stay applications also stand disposed of.

¶35

(KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA),J.

¶36

Govind/-

¶37

All corrections made in the judgment/order have been incorporated in the judgment/order being emailed.

¶38

Govind Sharma, Sr.PA

Sabna Khan v. University of Raj and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sabna Khan v. University of Raj 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

Ramfal Vs State of Rajasthan and Anr.

Bhagwati Lal Vs Chiranji Lal and Others

Vimla and Anr. Vs State Education Departmentors

Kishore Singh Vs Prem Singh Mehra and Others

Bodi Lal and Others Vs Hanuman and Others

State of Raj and Anr. Vs Smt Usha Acharya