IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2017 BEFORE:
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE G.NARENDAR WRIT PETITION No.42362/2017 (EDN RES) BETWEEN T.KIRAN S/O LAKSHMI KUMAR.T.E., AGE: 25 YEARS, R/AT NO.224/A, 7TH CROSS, LAKSHMI LAYOUT, BEHIND AREKERE MICO LAYOUT, BANNERGHATTA ROAD, BANGALORE-560076. ... PETITIONER (BY SRI. DIWAKAR E.R., ADV.) AND 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION M S BUILDING, BANGALORE-560001, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY.
2. VISVESVARAYA TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY JNANA SANGAMA, MACHHE, BELGAUM-590018, REP. BY ITS REGISTRAR.
3. DR. AMBEDKAR INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY OUTER RING ROAD, MALLATHAHALLI, BANGALORE-560056, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL.
4. CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATION DR. AMBEDKAR INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, OUTER RING ROAD, MALLATHAHALLI, BANGALORE-560056.
5. DEAN (ACADEMIC) DR. AMBEDKAR INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, OUTER RING ROAD, MALLATHAHALLI, BANGALORE 560056. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. NEELAKANTAPPA POOJAR, HCGP FOR R1, SRI. SANTHOSH S.NAGARALE, ADV. FOR R2, SRI. SHEKARAPPA AND SRI. H.V.HARISH, ADVS. FOR R3 TO R-5.) * * * THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO QUASH ANNEX-D RESULT SHEET DATED 22.1.2014 HOLDING NOT SUFFICIENT ATTENDANCE DOES NOT AMOUNT TO FAILURE IN MATHEMATICS-3 AND CONSEQUENTLY SET ASIDE THE ENDORSEMENT DATED 1.9.2017 ISSUED BY R-3 VIDE ANNEX-K HOLDING THAT PETITIONER HAS NOT COMPLETED FIVE ATTEMPTS ETC.
THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR “PRELIMINARY HEARING IN B GROUP” THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.
2. Learned counsel for the 3rd respondent institute files into the Court a memo enclosing herein a copy of the minutes of the Sixth Academic Council Meeting held on 02.09.2014 and 09.07.2016 and the copy of the Extract of the Guidelines for Implementation of Academic Autonomy.
3. It is not in dispute that the petitioner has exhausted the 5 attempts, which has been permitted by the 3rd respondent institute as per the Regulation 14.0 of the Academic Regulations and having failed to clear the subjects, the petitioner has been declared being Not Fit for the Technical Course [NFTC] and it is this decision, which is called in question by the petitioner herein and the consequential action of preventing him/her from taking up the examination to complete the course.
4. Learned counsel for the respondents and the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that in the light of the resolution passed by the Sixth Academic Council Meeting held on 02.09.2014 with regard to review of the minutes of the previous academic council meeting held on 31.05.2014 on item No.6 and the resolution passed by the Academic Council in its Meeting held on 09.07.2016 with regard to agenda No.3, whereby similarly placed students have been permitted to take up examinations, the petitioner herein also becomes entitled for a similar relief on the ground of parity. It is no-doubt true that the 3rd respondent institute cannot be coerced in the matter of extension of the relief but, it is also true that it ought to and shall treat similarly placed students on similar terms.
5. The fact remains that the petitioner pursuant to the interim order granted by this Court, has been permitted to participate in the course and has been attending the classes. Hence, the petitioner shall be permitted to take up examinations and the 3rd respondent institute shall publish the results of such examinations and to issue necessary certificate and credentials insofar as the petitioner is concerned.
The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.
CT-HR Ksm* Sd/- JUDGE