1. The petitioner college has taken out present petition against communication dated 27.12.2011 by the respondent university. By the said communication dated 27.12.2011 the university has declined to approve the admissions granted by the petitioner college to four students whose names are mentioned in the petition.
2. According to the petitioner the admissions were granted by the petitioner within time limit extended by respondent university, for the purpose of finalizing admission process.
On perusal of the impugned communication dated 27.12.2011 it is noticed that while the respondent university has informed the petitioner college that the admission granted by the petitioner college are not approved by the admission committee, any reason for not approving the admissions has not been mentioned.
3. The students are not before this Court, however the fact remains that because of the decision of the respondent university, the students are the directly affected parties.
4. As mentioned in the order dated 16.3.2012 present petition was adjourned to today at the request of the learned advocate for the petitioner who desired to place on record certain documents. Today draft amendment and affidavit have been placed on record under which certain documents have been placed on record.
5. The petitioner has expressed urgency for appropriate and necessary order in view of the fact that the examination for M.Ed. (first semester) is to commence from tomorrow i.e. 20.3.2012 and if the concerned students are not allowed to appear in examination then their entire semester will be rendered futile.
Under the earlier affidavit dated 15.3.2012 the petitioner college has placed on record the details of the number of days / classes attended by the concerned four students and it is declared that the students have attended minimum number of classes required for taking examination. The said fact is, at this stage, not disputed.
6. In present petition it is necessary to note that diverse issues including questions about the right of the college to admit the students in management quota and whether approval of university qua the admissions in management quota is required or not are involved in present petition.
The issue about the procedure require to be followed for granting admission, the university's right to approve admission and finalize the admission for both categories and the time limit within which the entire process of admission was to be completed and whether the process was completed within prescribed time limit and as per the prescribed procedure or not are also raised and involved in present petition.
The respondent university has also raised several objections against the process of admission carried out by the petitioner college and the respondent university has also opposed action of petitioner college of granting admission outside the process of Admission Committee and without approval of the respondent university. All the aforesaid and such other issues raised by the contesting parties are required to be examined.
7. It is not in dispute that the examination for the M. Ed. (first semester) is to commence from 20.3.2012 i.e. tomorrow.
Therefore, situation may arise whereby at the end of the final hearing if the petition is allowed in favour of the petitioner college but if the students are not allowed to appear in the ensuing examination by way of interim arrangement, then there is likelihood that an irreversible situation may arise and the students may be put to suffer loss of one semester or they may be obliged to clear (if that is permissible) all examination at a stretch in the second semester which may prove to be unbearable burden on the students.
8. Therefore, so as to avert and avoid such irreversible situation wherein the ultimate sufferer may be the student, if ultimately the petitioner colleges succeeds in petition, it is considered appropriate, in peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, to pass an order without forming precedent.
In such circumstances the request from the side of the petitioner is made that appropriate direction to the respondent university to permit the students to appear in the ensuing examinations (which are to commence from 20.3.2012) may be granted by way of interim relief.
9. This Court has considered said request.
10. As mentioned hereinabove, several issues are raised and involved in present petition which include interpretation of the relevant stipulation, in the prospectus, with reference to the admission procedure.
On one hand the respondent university has asserted that the petitioner college has granted admission in violation of the process prescribed by the university and that therefore the admissions granted by the respondent university are not valid.
On the other hand the petitioner college has claimed that it has conducted the procedure in accordance with the instructions issued by the respondent university.
11. The petitioner herein has relied on the order dated 16.3.2012 passed in Special Civil Application No.979 of 2012. On the other hand learned advocate for the respondent university has submitted that the case of the students is on different footing even on factual aspect so far as the Special Civil Application No.979 of 2012 is concerned, inasmuch as in present case the approval to the admission as in Special Civil Application No.979 of 2012 has not been granted. Furthermore, according to the respondent university in present case even the examination forms have not been forwarded by the petitioner college to the university whereas Special Civil Application No.979 of 2012 the examination forms were forwarded by the college and that therefore there is no justification in granting similar order i.e. similar order to the order dated 16.3.2012 in Special Civil Application No.979 of 2012, in present case.
On factual aspect the case in present petition is not at par with the facts in Special Civil Application No979 of 2012 inasmuch as neither the admissions are approved (as in Special Civil Application No.979 of 2012) nor examination forms of the students are forwarded, (as in the Special Civil Application No.979 of 2012) however in view of substantial issue involved in the petition and for reasons mentioned in para 7 and 8 of this order present order is passed at this stage.
12. At this stage it is an undisputed position that in present case until now the respondent university has not approved admission in respect of the student (four students in this case) whose case is involved in present petition and it is also undisputed position that petitioner college has not forwarded examination form in respect of four students.
However, the learned Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner college is ready and willing to pay appropriate cost to the respondent university so as to ensure that the concerned four student is at least permitted to appear in the examination subject to further orders on merits.
Learned advocate for the respondent university has raised serious objection reiterated other objection on merits as well as objection on the ground that even examination form has not been submitted by the petitioner college in any case to the concerned four student. i.e. (1) Bhatt Mona Mukeshbhai, (2) Kanabar Kirtida Ajay, (3) Falnikar Archana Vinod, (4) Giri Sadhana Surendra.
Therefore on the condition that petition college will pay a sum of Rs.10,000/- for each student towards cost to the respondent university, the respondent university is directed to allow the said four students i.e. (1) Bhatt Mona Mukeshbhai, (2) Kanabar Kirtida Ajay, (3) Falnikar Archana Vinod, (4) Giri Sadhana Surendra to appear in the M.Ed. (1st Semester) examination which are to commence from 20.3.2012.
The university shall allow the aforesaid students to take their examinations / appear in the examination and answer the test and for that purpose the university shall also take necessary steps to issue Hall Ticket and shall complete other formalities to enable the said students to appear in the examination and answer their papers.
It is, however clarified that present order shall not create any right and / or any privilege and / or any equity of any nature whatsoever in favour of the concerned students and / or the petitioner college. It is also clarified that on the strength of present order or on any other premise based on this order neither the petitioner college nor the concerned students will claim any right and / or equity including the request to ask the respondent university to disclose / declare the results of this examination. It is also clarified that if it is one of the requirements / conditions that for admission in second semester the student must clear first semester then the concerned students shall not, either on the strength of present order or otherwise on the ground that he / they have already appeared in the examination and / or that though they have appeared in the examination the results are not declared / are withheld claim any right for admission in second semester as well.
It is also clarified that present order is passed only by way of interim arrangement and out of concern for the academic year of the students since it is prima facie shown to this Court that the said students have taken their classes during the semester and have completed minimum number of attendance / classes. Or course, the respondent university has disputed these details and the same are yet to be examined at the time of hearing of the petition. Therefore, it is clarified that present order shall be subject to the final decision in the petition.
13. The aforesaid order has been passed in presence of Registrar of respondent university and learned Counsel for the respondent university. Therefore, learned advocate and the concerned officer of the respondent university shall convey the order of this Court to the university and necessary action can be taken.
S.O.
to 29.3.2012. Direct service is permitted.
Suresh* (K.M.THAKER,J.) Top