IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU ON THE 20TH DAY OF MARCH, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. G. PANDIT WRIT APPEAL NO.1464 OF 2018 (EDN-RES) BETWEEN 1. THE BANGALORE UNIVERSITY JNANABHARATHI CAMPUS REPRESENTED BY REGISTRAR BENGALURU -560 056.
2. THE VICE CHANCELLOR THE BENGALURU UNIVERSITY JNANABHARATHI CAMPUS BENGALURU -560 056.
3. THE REGISTRAR THE BENGALURU UNIVERSITY JNANABHARATHI CAMPUS BENGALURU-560 056.
… APPELLANTS (BY SRI D ASWATHAPPA, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. PRASANTH SINGH SON OF Er.DHYAN SINGH AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.8/180F-20D RAJENDRA VIHAR COLONY NEWADA, SUNDARPUR, VARNASI UTTARPRADESH – 211 005.
2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION M.S.BUILDING BANGALORE-560 001.
3. THE PRINCIPAL GARDEN CITY COLLEGE T.C.PALYA BENGALURU -560 056 ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.S BASAVARAJ, AGA FOR RESPONDENT No.2) THIS APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT DATED 16.04.2018 PASSED IN WRIT PETITION No.48344/2017 (EDN-RES).
THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, S.G.PANDIT J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT Aggrieved by the order dated 16.04.2018 in W.P.No.48344 of 2017 passed by the learned Single Judge by which, the writ petition was allowed, respondents 2 to 4 therein have preferred this appeal.
2. The petitioner, a student of M.S. (Mass Communication) has filed the writ petition seeking for a direction to the respondents to grant reasonable time for submission of dissertation for Master Degree course and to accept the dissertation of the petitioner and for declaration of results of the VI semester after accepting the dissertation. It is stated that the petitioner was admitted to 2 years M.S. (Mass Communication) Post Graduation Course during the academic year 2012-13. It is also stated that the petitioner successfully completed IV semester examination in the month of May 2014, but he had not submitted dissertation which carries 100 marks. When he was preparing for his dissertation in the month of June 2014 he fell seriously ill and could not complete his dissertation and he was under treatment for his ill-health for more than three years. As per Annexure-G, the petitioner made a representation to the 4th respondent- Registrar, Bengaluru University along with medical certificates seeking permission to submit dissertation. The petitioner also submitted representations on 09.08.2017 and on 01.09.2017. As there was no response, the petitioner filed writ petition.
3. The respondents filed statement contending that the M.S. Communication course is of two years consisting of four semesters. As per clause 10 of the Regulations, it is mandatory for a student to submit dissertation at the end of IV semester and before the commencement of final examination. Unless the dissertation is submitted, the student is not permitted to appear for the final examination.
4. The learned Single Judge on consideration of the contentions of the respective parties, allowed the writ petition permitting the petitioner to file his dissertation within one month and if the same is furnished within one month, the respondents are directed to take further needful action and thereafter to declare the final result of the petitioner. The said order is impugned in this appeal.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and learned counsel for the respondents.
6. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the M.S. Communication course is of two years duration consisting of four semesters. At the end of fourth semester, as per Clause 10 of the Regulations, one shall submit dissertation before commencement of final examination. Unless dissertation is submitted, the student shall not be allowed to take final examination. It is submitted that the Course is of two years, which could be extendable by another two years for completion. One has to complete the course within four academic years. Hence sought for setting aside the order of the learned Single Judge by allowing this appeal.
7. Per contra, learned counsel for the petitioner/respondent No.1 submits that the respondent- University permitted him to take fourth semester examination and accordingly, he has written the examination. As he fell ill, he could not submit dissertation. The representation made by the petitioner is not answered by the University. The learned Single Judge has rightly granted equitable relief, which needs no interference 8. On hearing the learned counsels for the parties and on going through the appeal papers, we are of the view that the learned Single Judge by his reasoned order has granted equitable relief to the petitioner and the respondents have not made out any ground to interfere with the said order. The petitioner got admitted to the two years M.S. Communication course during the academic year 2012-13 which consisted of four semesters. The petitioner has completed his Course in May 2014. The respondents have permitted the petitioner to appear for fourth semester final examination in May 2014. Annexure-E is the Marks Card in respect of fourth semester final examination, wherein it indicates that the petitioner has passed all the four subjects and against dissertation, it is shown as absent. The petitioner has stated that in June 2014 he fell ill and could not complete dissertation work, so as to submit before the respondents. Due to his illness, he went to his native place Lucknow and underwent treatment. On improvement in his health in the year 2017, he made representations seeking permission to submit dissertation which was not responded by the respondents. But, it is significant to note that the Clause 10 of the Regulations which the learned Single Judge has noted would not permit one to take final examination unless the dissertation is submitted. But in the case on hand, the petitioner was permitted to write fourth semester final examination. The petitioner along with Annexure-G has produced medical certificates which would indicate that the petitioner was suffering from neurological problem.
9. Regulation 10 reads as follows:
X. Dissertation:
a. All students of M.S. Communication programme shall be required to submit a dissertation at the end of M.S. Communication, fourth semester and before the commencement of M.S. Communication final examination. Unless the dissertation is submitted before the examination, the student shall not be allowed to take the final examination. The dissertation shall be evaluated for 100 marks and followed by Viva Voce for 50 marks both evaluation and Viva Voce will be done by External examiners and Internal examiners.”
10. The above regulation would not indicate the consequence for non-submission of dissertation. But, it only states that unless one submits dissertation, he would not be eligible for taking final examination. In the absence of any consequence, the respondents permitted the petitioner to write fourth semester final examination. The only formality which remains is to receive the dissertation from the petitioner and on evaluation, to announce the results. The learned Single Judge at paragraph 11 of the order has deprecated the attitude of the University and has rightly allowed the writ petition, permitting the petitioner to furnish dissertation within one month, further directing the University to evaluate and to declare final result, which needs no interference. The relief granted by the learned Single Judge is an equitable relief. In the facts of the present case the appellant has not made out any ground to interfere with the order of the learned Single Judge.
11. For the foregoing reasons, the writ appeal is dismissed.
Sd/- Sd/-
JUDGE JUDGE mpk/-* CT:bms