Jyoti Verma vs National Institute of Technology and Others

Rakesh Kumar Jain, J.—The petitioner is aggrieved against cancellation of her admission vide letter dated 24.09.2013 and has prayed for a direction to respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to allow her to attend the classes, appear in the sessional examinations which were commencing from 7th November, 2013 and to complete the MBA course. The petitioner passed her B.Com. from Kurukshetra University, Kurukshetra. She applied for admission to National Institute of Technology (NIT) in MBA course. After getting admission, she submitted her two Degree Marks Certificates (DMCs) on 23.08.2013 but she could not deposit the final semester DMC because, according to her, she had taken examination in December, 2012 but her result was not declared for the fault of respondent No. 3. Consequently, for want of DMC, her admission has been cancelled by the impugned order. Thus, the case of the petitioner is that due to fault of respondent No. 2, she should not be penalized.

After notice, reply has been filed alleging that the petitioner appeared for the B.Com. 3rd semester examination for the first time in December, 2010 vide roll No. 1110989. The result was declared on 04.06.2011. She got re-appear in two papers i.e. C-304 and 315. However, she was declared pass in paper C-301 by awarding 1 grace mark. The petitioner applied for re-evaluation but her result remained unchanged. She submitted examination form for re-appearing in the papers to be held in December, 2011, but she remained absent. She again filled up examination form for the examination to be held in December, 2012 and appeared in 3 papers i.e. C-301, C-304 and C-315, though she was not eligible to appear in paper C-301 because she has already been declared pass in that paper in the examination held in December, 2010. Faced with this situation, the petitioner submitted an application for withdrawal of grace mark awarded to her to clear paper C-301 in the examination for B.Com. 3rd semester held in December, 2010, but the application was time barred as it could have been made within one month of the dispatch of DMC by the University and the petitioner did not submit the application in time, rather applied for the re-evaluation of the said result which, however, remain unchanged. As such, the request of the petitioner for withdrawal of grace mark awarded to her to clear paper C-301 of B.Com. 3rd semester was not accepted. The petitioner submitted another application on 22.10.2013 requesting to condone the delay in applying for withdrawal of grace mark awarded in paper C-301 of B.Com. 3rd semester. The University, by taking a lenient view, decided to condone the delay and her result of B.Com. 3rd semester held in December, 2012, was ordered to be revised on 23.10.2013 and on the same day, her revised result was declared. Thus, there was no delay on the part of the University in declaring result of the petitioner of B.Com. 3rd semester held in December, 2012, in which besides appearing in two papers in which she had re-appear, she appeared in a paper which she had cleared in the examination held in December, 2010.

After hearing learned counsel for the parties and considering the aforesaid reply filed by the University, it cannot be held that there is a fault on the part of the respondent-University as though the result of the petitioner of B.Com. 3rd semester held in December, 2010 was declared but she insisted upon for withdrawal of the grace mark in paper C-301 and after condoning the delay, the result has been duly announced by the respondents. In view thereof, I do not find any merit in the present petition and hence, the same is hereby dismissed.