Miss Seema Sharma vs Punjabi University and others

This judgment of mine will dispose of Civil Writ Petitions Nos. 13797 and 15530 of 1992.

For facility of reference the facts of Miss Seema Sharma''s case (Civil Writ Petition No. 13797 of 1992) are being adverted to The facts of both the cases are almost identical but wherever the facts differ, the same will be adverted to. Miss Seema Sharma while studying in M. M. Modi College, Patiala appeared in B.Sc. Part I examination held by the Punjabi University Patiala in April, 1990. She passed in all papers except in Chemistry and, therefore, her result was to re-appear in the subject of Chemistry. She was allowed to join the next class, i.e. B.Sc. Part II. She appeared in reappear paper (Chemistry) in September 1990, but failed to clear the same. In April 1991 she again appeard in reappear paper of chemistry of B. Sc. Part I and along with that, she also appeared in B. Sc. Part II. Though she cleared B. Sc. Part II examination as a whole yet she could not clear re-appear paper of Chemistry of B. Sc. Part I. It may be observed here that she was allowed to join B. Sc. Part-Ill Class after She had been declared successful in B. Sc. Part-II. In April, 1992 petitioner appeared in B. Sc. Part III examination, but did not appear in B. Sc. Part-I re-appear paper in Chemistry. On 15-7-1992 the University sent provisional information regarding result of the petitioner of B. Sc. Part III, examination. She was informed that her B. Sc. Part III examination result was being withheld as she had not cleared the lower examination. However, according to the provisional information the petitioner had passed in all the papers of B. Sc. Part III. The difference on facts as far as the other case i.e. that of Miss Seema Kaushal (Civil Writ Petition No. 15530 of 1992) is concerned she got reappear in one of the papers of B. Sc. Part III.

Petitioner was not allowed by the University to sit to dear her B. Sc, Part I (Chemistry Paper) in supplementary examination held in October 1992 which led the petitioner-Miss Seema Sharma to file writ Petition No. ''13797 of 1992. The Motion Bench while issuing notice of motion on October 6, 1992 directed the respondent-University to permit the petitioner provisionally to take her examination of B. Sc. part I (Chemistry) which was to be subject to the final decision in the writ petition. (There are no such interim directions in case of Miss Seema Kaushal as she approached the court after the examination of B. Sc. part I was over).

In paras Nos. 13 and 14 of Miss Seema Sharma''s writ petition it has been averred as under :-

"That while denying the petitioner IIIrd chance to re-appear in the supplementary Examination the respondent University has acted in a discriminatory manner and its action is wholly violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. It is respectfully submitted that one Miss Parmjit Kauir, a class fellow of the petitioner in M. M. Modi College, Patiala also got re-appear in one subject B. Sc. Part-1 in the annual examination held in April, 1990. Said Parmjit Kaur availed two chances of Re-appear like the petitioner in September, 1990 and in April, 1991. However said Parmjit Kaur was given third chance to re-appear in the Supplementary Examination and the said chance was given to her without any special circumstances. Said Miss Parmjit Kaur qualified in the supplementary examination only in the third chance. It is most relewant to state here that like the petitioner said Miss Parmjit Kaur also qualified the B. Sc. Part II examination before qualifying in the Supplementary Examination of B. Sc. Part I. The Case of Miss Paramjit Kaur was identical with the petitioner."

"Para 14: That even after permitting 3rd chance to Miss Paramjit Kaur stated above the respondent-University withheld her result of the Supplementary Examination. Said Miss Paramjit Kaur approached this Hon''ble Court and her result was declared only after the notice of motion. The petitioner, therefore, is entitled to be given the same treatment."

To this the reply of University is as under :-

"That in reply to para 13 of the Writ Petition it is submitted that is already stated the petitioner is not eligible to appear in September/October, 1992 examination. She has already exhausted, the admissible chances to qualify the paper of Chemistry B.Sc. Pan I. However, it is not feasible to comment upon the candidature of Miss Paramjit Kaur an alleged class fellow of the petitioner in M.M. Modi College, Patiala in the absence of Roll Number and Session in which the said Miss Paramjit Kaur appeared in the examination."

"That the filing of the writ petition by Miss Paramjit Kaur is a matter of record. As already stated, in the absence of the details about the said Miss Paramjit Kaur regarding the Roll Number and the Session, it is difficult for the answering respondents to give a proper reply. The petitioner, as already stated, is not eligible for appearing in September/October, 1992 examination for clearing her Chemistry paper."

Before the writ petition was admitted, the petitioner also filed re-joinder in which the details of writ petition filed by Miss Paramjit Kaur were given.

Learned ''Counsel for the petitioners submitted that they are being discriminated inasmuch as similarly situated person, i.e. Miss Paramjit Kaur was allowed third additional chance to clear her B.Sc. Part I paper. He pointed out that as far as Miss Seema Sharma is concerned, she had already appeared in B.Sc. Part I (Chemistry) subject in pursuance of the order of this Court. It was also submitted that simply on the ground that petitioners had not passed the B.Sc. Part I examination within two chances, it would be too harsh now at this stage to cancel the result of the petitioners of B.Sc. Part-II and Part-Ill as Miss Seema Sharma has already cleared B.Sc. Part-II and Part-Ill examination whereas, Miss Seema Kaushal also cleared her B.Sc. Part-II and Part-Ill examination, except for one paper.

Taking into consideration the facts that a similarly situated person like the petitioner, Miss Paramjit Kaur was allowed by the University one additional chance to clear re-appear paper of B.Sc. Part-I and also the fact that Miss Seema Sharma has already appeared in B.Sc. Part-I examination by virtue of interim order of this Court and further fact that the petitioners have cleared their B.Sc. Part-II as well as Part-Ill examinations, (Miss Seema Kaushal has to reappear in one paper of B.Sc. Part I and Part-III), I am of the view that it will be too harsh to put the clock back at this stage. Once the petitioners were allowed to appear in B.Sc. Part II and Part III examinations it will really be too stringent a view if they are not allowed to clear their B.Sc. Part-I examination by giving them an additional chance. As observed earlier, under similar situation, one Miss Paramjit Kaur was given one additional chance.

For the foregoing reasons, these writ petitions are allowed and the respondents are directed to give one additional chance to the petitioners to clear their B.Sc. Part-I examination. As noticed earlier the petitioner-Miss Seema Sharma has already appeared for B.Sc. Part-I (Chemistry) subject by virtue of interim orders of this Court. Let her result of that examination as also the result of B.Sc. Part-II and Part-Ill be declared on regular basis.

Miss Seema Kaushal be also given one additional chance in the forthcoming examination to appear in B.Sc. Part-I (Chemistry) subject for which, it is stated, that she has already applied to appear. If she clears her said paper, then her result of B.Sc. Part II and Part III be also declared on regular basis. It is stated by the counsel for petitioner that there is some clash of dates of examination of B.Sc. Part-I (Chemistry) as well as B.Sc. Part-Ill examination (Chemistry) in the forthcoming examination. If that is so, the University authorities would see that the petitioner can appear in both the papers by making some special arrangements and if no special arrangement is possible then let the petitioner take B.Sc. Part-I examination now in the forthcoming examination and be permitted to take B.Sc. Part-Ill re-appear paper in the next examination.

There will be no order as to costs. Let a copy of this order attested by my Reader be given Dasti to the petitioner''s counsel.

Petition allowed.