Mamta Tak vs State of Rajasthan and Others

Sangeet Raj Lodha, J.—By way of this writ petition, the petitioner is seeking directions to the respondents to declare her eligible to appear in LL.B. II year Examination conducted by the respondent-Maharaja Ganga Singh University, Bikaner commencing from March, 2013, accept the application form for the Examination sent by her by speed post and to allow her to appear in the said examination. Further directions are sought in terms that the petitioner may be permitted to appear in practical paper of the subject Professional Ethics Lawyer''s Acct. and BB. Relations with LL.B. II year Examination, 2013. The petitioner appeared in LL.B. I year examination, 2012. The result was declared wherein she was awarded supplementary in the subjects Contract I and Contract II. That apart, she was shown absent in practical paper of Professional Ethics Lawyer''s Acct. and BB. Relations. It is stated that the petitioner could not appear in the practical paper of Professional Ethics Lawyer''s Acct. and BB. Relations on 9.2.12 as her marriage was to be solemnized in her village on 10.2.12. The petitioner applied for revaluations of both the papers i.e. Contract I and Contract II wherein she was awarded supplementary. The result of the revaluation was declared wherein she was declared passed in both the subjects. It is stated that the revaluation result was declared after the last date fixed for submission of the form for supplementary examination and therefore, she could not appear in the supplementary examination as well. It is stated that in June/July, the petitioner was granted provisional admission in LL.B. II year. She pursued her studies, however, she has not been permitted to appear in the LL-B year Examination inasmuch as, she had not passed the LL.B. I year as on the date. The petitioner was not allowed to submit the form for LL.B. II year Examination, 2003 online and therefore, the application form was sent by her on 12.2.13 by speed post alongwith a draft of Rs. 3300/-, which includes six times late fee. The petitioner made the representation for permitting her to appear in the examination but to no avail. Hence, this petition.

On 8.3.13, a coordinate Bench of this Court passed an interim order in favour of the petitioner in the following terms:

Looking to the urgency of the matter, I deem it appropriate to direct the respondent University to accept the admission form of the petitioner for LL.B. II year examination provisionally and if the final examination are going to be conducted, petitioner may be provisionally permitted to appear in the examination of LL.B. II year.

List this matter on 05.04.2013.

It is made it clear that this order will not create any right in favour of the petitioner, if ultimately, the writ petition is dismissed.

It is stated that pursuant to the interim order, the petitioner has appeared in the examination.

The respondent-University has filed reply to the writ petition accompanied by an application under Art. 226(3) of the Constitution of India for vacating the interim order. The respondents have raised a preliminary objection in terms that before approaching this Court, the petitioner preferred a civil suit alongwith an application seeking temporary injunction before the Additional Civil Judge (J.D.) No. 2, Bikaner claiming the same relief which is claimed in the present writ petition. It is submitted that the application seeking temporary injunction as dismissed by the civil court on 18.2.13 and the suit is still pending consideration before that Court. It is submitted that the petitioner has concealed this material fact from this Court and therefore, the present writ petition deserves to be dismissed on this count alone. It is submitted that in view of the pendency of the suit claiming the same relief which is claimed in the writ petition, being pending before the civil Court, this writ petition preferred is not maintainable. It is submitted that the petitioner claims that she was entitled for grace of 7 marks in practical paper of Professional Ethics Lawyer''s Acct. and BB. Relations whereas, as per the ordinance of the University, a candidate is required to secure minimum 36% marks in theory as well as practical examination. It is submitted that the petitioner did not even appear in practical paper of Professional Ethics Lawyer''s Acct. and BB. Relations and therefore, the question of awarding grace marks does not arise. It is submitted that the petitioner did not appear in the practical paper in the supplementary examination as well and therefore, she having not passed the LL.B. I year examination, cannot be permitted to appear in LL.B. II year examination. Relying upon Ordinance 253C(i), it is submitted that if a candidate is declared eligible for appearing in the supplementary examination at the LL.B. I year Professional/Academic Class will be allowed provisional admission to LL.B. II year Class, however, in the event of his failing at the supplementary examination, his provisional admission to LL.B. II year Class will automatically stand cancelled and such candidate shall have to appear in LL.B. I year examination as an ex-student in all the papers prescribed for the course, it is submitted that since the petitioner did not appear in the supplementary examination in the paper and therefore, her admission to LL.B. II year class automatically stands cancelled and she cannot be permitted to appear in LL.B. II year examination.

By way of rejoinder to the reply filed, the petitioner has taken the stand that the petitioner''s revaluation result was declared in the month of November, 2012 whereas the process of supplementary examination was over a long ago. It is submitted that on the mark sheet of the revaluation the date of declaration of the result is printed 30.8.12 but due to carelessness of the respondents, the mark sheets of the revaluation was dispatched later, It is submitted that since the petitioner revaluation result was declared after the last date fixed for submission of the form of supplementary examination, she could not take part in the said examination. It is submitted that the petitioner cannot be punished for no fault on her part.

On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondents reiterating the stand taken in the reply to the writ petition, submitted that by virtue of Ordnance 253 C(i), the petitioner cannot be permitted to appear in LL.B. II year Examination inasmuch as, she has not passed the LL.B. I year Examination and therefore, she was required to appear in all the papers of LL.B. I year Examination as an ex-student.

I have considered the rival submissions and perused the material on record.

Admittedly, the petitioner was declared eligible for appearing at the supplementary examination in three papers namely, Contract I, Contract II and practical paper of Professional Ethics Lawyer''s Acct. and BB. Relations, it is true that the petitioner had applied for revaluation of the answer sheets of two papers Contract I and Contract II. But then, if the result of revaluation was not declared then she could have appeared in three papers at supplementary examination. Be that as it may, there was no question of the petitioner waiting for the result of the revaluation so far as her taking up the supplementary examination of practical paper of Professional Ethics Lawyer''s Acct. and BB. Relations is concerned. The petitioner remained absent in the practical examination of the paper Professional Ethics Lawyer''s Acct. and BB. Relations and therefore, the question of her being entitled to any grace marks as a result of her being declared passed in the paper of Contract I and Contract II and increase in the total marks obtained, does not arise. Since the petitioner failed to appear at the supplementary examination in the said paper, her provisional admission to LL.B. II year shall stand automatically cancelled by virtue of Ordinance 253C(i) of the respondent-University, which reads as under:

A Candidate who is declared eligible for appearing at the Supplementary Examination at the LL.B First Year (P)/(A) class will be allowed provisional admission to the LL.B (P)/(A) Second year Class. In the event of his failing at the said Supplementary examination, his provisional admission to LL.B II Year (P)/(A) class will automatically stand cancelled and such candidate shall have to appear in the LL.B First Year Examination as an ex-student in all the papers prescribed for the course.

The decisions of academic bodies regarding the curriculum of the course and examinations etc. needs to be adhered to strictly and cannot be interfered with by the Court without there being any justifiable reasons.

In this view of the matter, the petitioner is not entitled for any relief as claimed for.

Coming to the concealment of material fact and the petitioner availing the remedy of suit, it is to be noticed that the relief claimed in the suit filed and the present writ petition is substantially the same and therefore, in view of the pendency of the suit preferred, the petitioner cannot be permitted to avail the extra ordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India. Moreover, the petitioner having availed the remedy of suit and the injunction application preferred having been dismissed by the Court of competent jurisdiction, it was her duty to bring this fact to the notice of this Court. The concealment of all the necessary facts in this regard by the petitioner cannot be countenanced by this Court and as a matter of fact, the conduct of the petitioner disentitles her from invoking the extra ordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India. In view of discussion above, the writ petition lacks merits, it is hereby dismissed. No order as to costs.