IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2017 BEFORE:
THE HON’BLE MRS. JUSTICE B.V.NAGARATHNA W.P.Nos.54821-54822/2017 (EDN-EX) BETWEEN:
1.SHIVARAJ M S/O MALLAPPA, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, R/AT NARASAMMA PATTAREDDY PALLYA, KAGGALIPURA, BANGALORE SOUTH, BENGALURU-560082 2.SHIVALILA EKLURE D/O GURUPADAPPA EKLURE, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, R/AT MANGALPET BIDAR, BIDAR, KARNATAKA-585401 ..PETITIONERS (BY SRI GIRISH B BALADARE, ADVOCATE) AND:
1.VISHWESVARAYA TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY BELGAUM, REPRESENTED BY ITS VICE CHANCELLOR, BELAGAVI-590001 2.THE REGISTRAR (EVALUATION) VTU BELAGAVI, BELAGAVI-590001 3.CHIEF SUPERINTENDENT OF VTU EXAMINATION AUTHORITY, BELAGAVI-590001 4.PRINCIPAL SRINIVAS SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING SRINIVAS INTEGRATED CAMPUS, SRINIVASANAGAR MUKKA, MANGALURU-575021 5.PRINCIPAL DON BOSCO INSTITUTION OF TECHNOLOGY, KUMBLAGODU, MYSORE ROAD, BENGALURU-560074 ..RESPONDENTS (BY SRI SANTOSH S. NAGARALE, ADVOCATE FOR R-1 TO R-3) THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO:
QUASH THE NOTIFICATION DATED 24.11.2017 PASSED BY RESPONDENT NO.1 VIDE ANNEXURE-J AND CONSEQUENTLY ALLOW THE PETITIONERS TO APPEAR FOR THE EXAMINATION FOR THE ACADEMIC YEAR OF 2017-2018;
ISSUE A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS EXTENDING THE DURATION OF APPEARANCE FOR THE EXAMINATION TILL JULY 2019 BY TAKING PRESCRIBED EXAMINATION FEE.
THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Petitioners have assailed Notification dated 24.11.2017(Annexure-J) issued by the Registrar (Evaluation) of Visvesvaraya Technological University- Respondent No.2.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners were admitted to Master of Engineering course/M.Tech in the academic year 2013-14. They were expected to complete their course in four years’ time by submitting their thesis. However, they had three further academic years to complete the course, which expired in the academic year 2015-16. But as the petitioners have not cleared in all their subjects, they sought for a further opportunity to appear in the examinations to be held in the subjects in which they had not cleared. The Registrar(Evaluation) of Visvesvaraya Technological University, by Notification dated 24.11.2017 (Annexure-J), has extended the last date for submission of online examination application forms upto December-2017/January 2018 examination but not for students such as the petitioners who have been admitted in the academic year 2013-14.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that as far as the students who are admitted in the earlier academic years are concerned, the University has given them liberty beyond three years to complete the course and that a similar opportunity ought to have been made available to the petitioners herein and therefore, he submits that the impugned Notification dated 24.11.2017 is not in accordance with law.
4. Per contra, learned counsel Sri.Santosh S.Nagarale for respondents 1 to 3, who has appeared on advance notice, would submit that in the event the University is to extend additional opportunity to the petitioners herein, they could avail of the same, but under the extant regulations, they cannot be permitted to appear in the examinations, that too, by an interim order to be passed by this Court.
5. Having regard to the fact that Annexure-J specifically states that beyond four years, the petitioners are not entitled to any further opportunity to appear in the examinations in which they have not cleared, this Court, exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution, cannot direct the respondent-University to permit the petitioners to appear in further examinations to be conducted by the University that too, by an interim order. Such a direction would be a direction to the University to violate its extant Regulations which is impermissible in law. In the circumstances, no relief can be granted to the petitioners herein as sought by them. However, in the event the respondent-University affords further opportunity to the petitioners to complete their course, they are entitled to make use of such opportunity, if they are otherwise eligible to do so.
6. Subject to the aforesaid observation, the Writ Petitions are dismissed.
Sd/- JUDGE SBN