ORDER
1. The petitioner was a student at K.G.K. College, Moradabad in M.Sc. Physics. The institution is affiliated with Rohilkhand University. The petitioner had appeared in M.Sc. Part I and in one of the papers, she secured lesser marks According to the prevalent practice and Rule in Rohilkhand University, she had appeared for appearing in the Improvement Test in the said paper. She deposited the requisite fee for appearing in the improvement test. Simultaneously, the petitioner was permitted to join M.Sc. Part II and she appeared in M.Sc. Part II examination also. The petitioner was successful in the Improvement Test examination and has secured higher mark than the earlier examination from which she wanted to appear in the Improvement Test. Since the petitioner had appeared in final M.Sc. also, she claimed that her result of M.Sc. final was also to be declared taking into consideration the marks obtained in the Improvement Test in the said subject.
2. The respondent-University had declin ed to declare the result of the petitioners' M.Sc. final examination on account that according to a resolution of the meeting held on 9-1-1992, a candidate was not permitted to appear in two tests i.e. the Improvement Test, as well as the final class for which a person claimed to have been permitted. This resolution has been annexed by the respondents with their counter-affidavit as Annexure CA 1.
3. It is not disputed that this resolution was never communicated to the petitioner nor she was ever informed that she could not appear in M.Sc. final examination for which she regularly attended the class and after submission of the application, appeared in the final examination also. This was kept in such a secret way that the petitioner had never known and after she devoted her precious time for completion of the M.Sc. course, now the fate shows that she have to wait for another year.
4. There is no regulation or law on this point and Shri Pankaj Naqvi fairly accepted that there is no regulation which prohibits a candidate for appearing in the Improvement Test and final examination same year simultaneously. Sri Pankaj Naqvi only placed reliance on Annexure CA..1 dated 9-1-1992, which is resolution by the Examination Committee. It is clear from the facts and circumstances of the case that the respondents consented and permitted the petitioner to appear in M.Sc. final examination also and now they are estopped from placing her back on the basis of the resolution dated 9-1-1992.
5. This Court at the time of presentation of the writ petition, itself on 28-11-1994 was pleased to observe that "it is expected that during the time given the University will take constructive decision." The University after grant of time in the month of November, 1994, so far has not taken any other decision. Sri Pankaj Naqvi stated that since the matter was pending before this Court they have not taken any action or any decision in the matter.
6. After considering the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that this petition deserves to be allowed. The respondents are directed to declare the result of the petitioner of M.Sc. final (Physics), taking into account the marks obtained in the Improvement Test for which the petitioner had appeared simultaneously prior to appearing in M.Sc. final examination. The result be declared within a period of two weeks from the date of presentation of a certified copy of this order.
7. The writ petition is allowed. The parties to bear their own costs.
8. Petition allowed.