Disposed

Monika Kumari D/O Shri Shishram v. Rajasthan University of Health Sciences

Rajasthan HC16 Sept 2025CW/8058/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Nursing students alleged a college demanded Rs.1500 to let them take their Post Basic Nursing practical exam and refused them entry. The court declined to re-examine disputed facts under Article 226, upholding an enquiry committee's finding, but directed the University to permit the petitioners in the next supplementary examination at any centre except the respondent college's.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners permitted to appear in next supplementary examination conducted by respondent-University at any examination centre except that of respondent No.3; no fine or affiliation cancellation order

Monika Kumari D/O Shri Shishram Vs Rajasthan… — Education and Admissions | Rajasthan HC (2025)

¶1

[2025:RJ-JP:37732]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.8058/2020

¶4

Monika Kumari D/o Shri Shishram, Aged About 30 Years, R/o Village Hamirwas Post Bishanpura Tehsil Jhunjhunu District Jhunjhunu, Rajasthan

¶5

Bagesh Gurjar D/o Sri Kailash Gurjar, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Raiyan Ka Bas Post- Ghashipura Tehsil Neemkathana District Sikar, Rajasthan.

¶6

Deepika Sharma D/o Sri Brajraj Sharma, Aged About 28 Years, R/o Gali No 4 Shivaji Colony Niwai , District Tonk, Rajasthan.

¶7

----Petitioners

¶8

Versus

¶9

Rajasthan University Of Health Sciences, Through Its Registrar, Sector 18 Kumbha Marg, Pratap Nagar, Jaipur.

¶10

The Controller Of Examination, Rajasthan University Of Health Sciences, Sector 18 Kumbha Marg, Pratap Nagar, Jaipur.

¶11

The Principal Ckrd Memorial Nursing College, Nawalgarh Road, VPO Dhigal, District Jhunjhunu.

¶12

----Respondents

¶13

For Petitioner(s)	: Mr.	Ajit Kaswa
For Respondent(s)	: Mr.	Gaurav Singh
	Mr.	Jwala Prasad Jedia for
	Mr.	Suresh Kumar Dhenwal

¶14

JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND

¶15

Order

¶16

16/09/2025

¶17

The writ petition has been preferred by the petitioners with the following prayer:-

¶18

“It is, therefore, humbly prayed that your Lordships May be pleased to accept and allow this writ petition and

(2 of 4)

[2025:RJ-JP:37732]

[CW-8058/2020]

i). by an appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondents to conduct the regular Practical Examination of Post Basic Nursing (Final Year) for petitioners so their academic session does not get delayed.

¶23

ii). By an appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the appropriate authorities to take necessary strict action against the college for their illegal and malafide act, including imposition of monetary fine cancellation and of affiliation of the college.

¶24

iii). Any other appropriate direction which this Hon'ble order court deems just and proper in the facts and circumstances of this case may kindly also be passed in favour of the petitioner.”

¶25

By way of filing this writ petition, the petitioners are seeking directions against the respondents to conduct their regular practical examination of Post Basic Nursing (Final Year).

¶26

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that on the fateful day, i.e., 04.01.2020, when the petitioners went to the college for taking their practical examination, a demand of Rs.1500/- was raised by the college to allow them to appear in the aforesaid practical examination and when the petitioners refused to make the payment of the same, the petitioners were not allowed to appear in the practical examination, hence, under these circumstances, the petitioners have approached this Court with the aforesaid prayer.

¶27

Per contra , learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents opposes the arguments raised by learned counsel for the petitioners and submits that a complaint, in this regard, was submitted by the petitioners to the respondent-University and the complaint was thoroughly examined and the enquiry committee came to a conclusion that the allegations made in the complaint appear to be impractical. Learned counsel submits that as per the allegations levelled by the petitioners, the incident occurred on

[2025:RJ-JP:37732]

[CW-8058/2020]

(3 of 4)

04.01.2020, i.e., on the day of examination and result of the said examination was declared on 11.02.2020, but no complaint was made in between. Learned counsel submits that the complaint was made after declaration of the result, i.e., on 12.02.2020. Learned counsel further submits that, under these circumstances, no concrete evidence with regard to the allegationss was submitted by the petitioners, hence, under these circumstances, allegations levelled by the petitioners are baseless and the petitioners are not entitled to get any relief, as sought in the instant writ petition and it is liable to be rejected.

¶32

Heard and considered the submissions made at the Bar and perused the material available on record. 6. The basic thrust of the argument of counsel for the petitioners is that when the petitioners went to the college for taking their practical examination, a demand was raised by the college administration to make a payment of Rs.1500/- to them, failing which the petitioners were not allowed to take practical examination.

¶33

It appears that the aforesaid practical examination was taken on 04.01.2020 and result of the same was declared on 11.02.2020 and the complaint has been filed on 12.02.2020, i.e., after declaration of the result.

¶34

Various versions and cross-versions have been raised by the respective parties in support of their contentions, but this Court cannot enquire about the veracity and correctness of the same while exercising its writ jurisdiction contained under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

(4 of 4)

[2025:RJ-JP:37732]

[CW-8058/2020]

This Court finds no valid reason to discard the conclusion so drawn by the enquiry committee constituted on the complaint submitted by the petitioners.

¶39

However, looking to the fact that the petitioners have already undergone their two years of studies and their career is at stake, hence, in the interest of justice, the respondent-University is directed to permit the petitioners in the next supplementary examination whenever conducted by the respondent-University in any examination center except in the examination center of respondent No.3.

¶40

With the aforesaid observations, the writ petition stands disposed of. All pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

¶41

(ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J

¶42

Karan/6

Monika Kumari D/O Shri Shishram v. Rajasthan University of Health Sciences

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Monika Kumari D/O Shri Shishram v. Rajasthan University of Health Sciences

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kuldeep S/O Nanga Mali Vs State of Rajasthan

Narendra Kumar Mittal S/O Shri Kailash Chand Mittal Vs Ajiz Gaur S/O Shri Nizamuddin

Jai Bhawani Enterprises Vs Au Small Finance Bank Ltd.

Mohammad Sarfaraj S/O Shri Kamruddin Rangrej, Vs State of Rajasthan

Jahavi Sharma D/O Naresh Sharma Vs Board of Secondary Education

Mayank Kumar Sharma S/O Late Shri Dr. S.B. Sharma Vs State of Rajasthan