Petitioners, who are 8 in number, are stated to be students of B. Tech Course of second year of IIMT Engineering College, Meerut ( an institution affiliated to Mahamaya Technical University, erstwhile U.P. Technical University, Lucknow).
Petitioner before this Court alleged that they have been permitted to sit in the IIIrd Semester Examination conducted by the University, held in January, 2010. However, under the letter of the University dated 2.11.2010, the petitioner have been informed that there result have been detained as they could not achieve the required minimum attendance of 60%, as is mandatory to be eligible for appearing in the Semester Examination. Said order has been passed in pursuance to an order of the Writ Court dated 21.01.2010, passed in Writ Petition No. 58087 of 2010, copy whereof is enclosed as Annexure-2 to the writ petition. It is against this order of the University that the present writ petition has been filed.
A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the University as well as by the College categorically stating that the attendance achieved by the petitioners was less than that prescribed under the Statute, which regulates the eligibility for appearance in the Semester Examination of B. Tech. Course. Reference in that regard has been made to Clause 3, which provides that every student is required to attend all lectures, tutorial and practicals. Attendance can be relaxed 20% on medical ground and additional 15% by the Director of the institute.
Clause 3.3 categorically provides that no student will be allowed to appear in the end semester examination if he/she does not satisfied the over all average attendance requirements of clause no. 3.1 and clause 3.2and such candidates shall be treated to have failed and shall be further governed by clause no. 4.2 and 4.3.
From a simple reading of clause 3 of the Ordinance it is apparently clear that at least 65% attendance in the course is a condition precedent for being permitted to appear in the end semester examination and any candidate, who does not have such percentage of attendance (65%), he/she is not entitled or eligible to appear in the end semester examination. The Ordinance leave no discretion either with the University or with the colleges in the matter.
From the facts on record, so far as the attendance achieved by the petitioner is concerned, it is admittedly less than 60% and there is no challenge to the percentage of attendance so recorded by the University or by the college by the present petitioners. It is therefore held as a matter of fact that the petitioners had not achieved the required minimum percentage of attendance for being eligible to appear in the end semester examination, as required under clause 3.3.
The issue which now remains for consideration is, as to what would be the effect of the order of the college permitting the petitioner to appear in the examination despite having not achieved the required minimum over all attendance. It is settled law that there cannot be any waiver of the statutory provisions, which are mandatory in nature and which determine the eligibility of a candidate to appear in the end semester examination.
This Court may record that the course undertaken by the petitioners is a professional course and in order to achieve the knowledge of the subject concerned the law framing authorities have found it just and proper to fix a minimum percentage of attendance to be achieved by each student before being permitted to appear in the end semester examination. Such statutory provisions are always made in order to ensure that the purpose of education is achieved so that the student attend their classes regularly and are imparted education. This Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India shall not interfere in the matter where students fail to achieve the minimum attendance provided, even if the college has permitted them to appear in the end semester examination illegally.
In the totality of the circumstances on record, this Court finds no good ground to interfere with the order impugned. There cannot be a direction to the University to treat the petitioners to have appeared in the examination lawfully, so as to declare their result. Petitioners were ineligible to appear in the examination and therefore the University has rightly decided to not to declare the result. No writ can be issued by this Court asking the authorities to act contrary to law.
Let the college and the University take all necessary action in terms of Clause 4.2 and 4.3 of the Ordinance and to intimate the decision so taken to the petitioners.
In view of the aforesaid, writ petition is dismissed.
Order Date :- 1.12.2010 Pkb/