(Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL)
1. This matter was on Board yesterday and at the request of the learned advocate Mr. Jadeja, since the leave note was filed, it was prayed that the matter may be kept today. The Court had also indicated that such being admission to be granted to the student in any educational institution, it deserves consideration at the earliest. Therefore, at the request made on behalf of learned advocate Mr. Jadeja, it was kept today.
LPA/1078/2012 2/4 ORDER
2. Today, the matter was called out in the first sitting. Mr. Jadeja stated that he could not go through the papers, therefore, it may be kept at 2.30 p.m. Accordingly, we had accommodated him. In the second sitting, when the matter is taken up, learned advocate Mr. Jadeja again reiterated his request for time to file the reply. It was conveyed to him that if he is desirous to address this Court on merits, Court is ready to hear him but he shown disinclination, therefore, we found it proper to consider merits of the case.
3. It prima facie appears that at one point of time, criminal case was registered against the appellant-original petitioner and he was in custody and, thereafter, he has been released on bail. It is also an admitted position that the criminal case is pending. Therefore, the question which may arise for consideration is whether the student who has been found to have been involved in some criminal case pertaining to other than the study which is undergoing with the University should be debarred from prosecuting studies or not. In our prima facie view, even if a person is convicted under a serious offence, he is entitled to prosecute his studies. Further, in the present case, he has not been convicted so far and the criminal case is pending. Therefore, neither the Court nor the University can proceed on the basis that the person is convicted for the alleged offence. It LPA/1078/2012 3/4 ORDER is hardly required to be stated that a convict or a criminal is also entitled to improve himself and prosecute studies by gaining knowledge so long as it is not prohibited under the law. Therefore, we find that when the criminal case is not at all concerned with the study which the petitioner is prosecuting with respondents No.2 and 3, the University should not create any obstacle in allowing the petitioner to prosecute studies. Learned Single Judge has declined ad-interim relief on mere ground that the same would result into allowing the petition. It is true that in normal circumstances when the interim relief results into allowing the petition, the Court may decline interim relief or may not grant it but at the same time, it may vary from facts to facts and the emergent situation so require. We find that the ground for declining admission to the petitioner is prima facie unjustifiable. Further, if the petitioner is not allowed to prosecute studies and at the later stage, such petition is allowed, then, irreversible situation would arise. Therefore, considering the fact that it was pertaining to education of a student in the midst of his studies and declination on the part of the educational institution for grant of admission on the ground that he was involved in some other criminal case and he was arrested and thereafter, released on bail and the matter is LPA/1078/2012 4/4 ORDER pending before the criminal court, we find that it would be a case for grant of interim relief. Further aspect as to whether he would be entitled for degree or not can be considered at later stage.
4. Hence the appeal is admitted.
5. By way of interim relief, it is directed that the respondent No.2 and 3 shall not preclude the appellant original petitioner from prosecuting studies in B.E. Civil Engineering and consequently he would be required to be admitted in 8th Semester by the respondents, more particularly respondents no.2 and 3.
6. It is clarified that the prosecution of studies by the appellant original petitioner shall be subject to further orders as may be passed by this Court in the Letters Patent Appeal. After the course is completed and before the result is declared, it would be open to the either side to move this Court for final hearing of the Letters Patent Appeal. Civil Application stands disposed of accordingly.
(Jayant Patel,J.) (C.L. Soni,J.) an vyas