Vijay Kumar Bagari and Others vs The University of Rajasthan and Others

Alok Sharma, J.—This petition has been filed by the three students of the Shikshak Prakshishan Mahavidyalaya (hereinafter ''the College'') affiliated to the University of Rajasthan inter-alia for the purpose of holding them to be eligible for the B.Ed. examination, 2014.

The case of the three petitioners is that they successfully wrote the PTET examination 2013 and after on-line counseling were admitted to the College aforesaid for reading in the B.Ed. course for the academic session 2013-14. Subsequent to the admission the petitioners state to have deposited the requisite fee and attended the classes to an extent of over 75%- the minimum required attendance rendering them eligible to write the B.Ed. examination following the academic session 2013-14 which commenced 21.7.2014. It has been submitted that the examination forms along-with the requisite documents were forwarded to the University of Rajasthan for issuing of permission letters/admission cards for the aforesaid examination. It has been submitted that the attendance of the petitioners was notified to the University of Rajasthan by the College, yet the petitioners were not arbitrarily issued permission letters/admission cards for writing the said examination, 2014. Alleging arbitrariness in denial of permission letters/admission cards for writing the B.Ed. examination 2014 to be conducted by the University of Rajasthan, the petitioners approached this Court for directions that they be declared eligible to write the B.Ed. examination conducted by the University of Rajasthan commencing 21.7.2014 with a further direction to allow them to appear in the said examination following which their result be declared.

On the matter coming up before this Court on 23.7.2014, this Court passed an ad-interim ex-parte order while issuing notice on the petition and allowed the petitioners to appear in B.Ed. examination, 2014 subject to the condition that their results would be kept in sealed cover.

Reply to the petition has been filed. It has been submitted that as per the norms of the University of Rajasthan and on the basis of the decision of this Court on 5.12.1995 in the case Damodar Prasad Goyal v. Smt. P.L. Kushwaha and others-SBCW P. No. 4557/1994 and University of Rajasthan v. Shiv Charan Bairwa-DB Special Appeal (Writ) No. 310/2010 decided on 9.11.2010 to be eligible to write the B.Ed. examination it was required that at-least 75% attendance in the classes/lessons obtained. As against the said minimum eligibility, the Principal of the College where the petitioners were reading for the academic session 2013-14 for their B.Ed. course has submitted an affidavit (Annex. R/1) stating that the petitioner No. 1 Vijay Kumar had only 9% against 75% requisite attendance, petitioner No. 2-Ghanshyam Singh Shekhawat 4.5% attendance and Sundeep Soni 2%. It has been submitted that quite clearly the petitioners without the requisite attendance were not eligible to write the B.Ed. examination, 2014 and therefore the writ petition is completely misdirected and is deserving dismissal.

Mr. S.K Singodiya, counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that the petitioners were kept back from writing the examination on the purported ground of shortage of attendance as they could not satisfy the demand for illegal gratification made by the Principal of the College. It has been submitted that several students similarly situate but who had allegedly satisfied the demand for illegal gratification by the Principal of the aforesaid College were shown to have regularly attended classes/lessons at-least to the extent of 75% attendance and therefore were allowed to write the examination, 2014. Counsel has submitted that aside of the aforesaid the petitioners have appeared in the examination in issue on the basis of an interim order passed by this Court on 23.7.2014. Therefore this Court in the interest of justice and invoking its equity jurisdiction direct the respondent University to declare the result of the petitioners.

Heard the counsel appearing for the contesting parties. The eligibility for writing the B.Ed. examination, 2014 in terms of the University of Rajasthan Ordinance relating to requisite attendance has not been satisfied by the petitioners as per the affidavit of the Principal of the College. The petitioner No. 1 Vijay Kumar had 9% attendance against 75%, petitioner No. 2-Ghanshyam Singh 4.5% and the petitioner No. 3 Sundeep Soni 2%. There is thus no occasion for this Court to allow the petition in the facts as obtain notwithstanding that under the ex-parte interim order dated 23.7.2014 passed by this Court, the petitioners wrote the examination albeit subject to their result being kept in sealed cover. The submission of the counsel appearing for the petitioners with regard to the FIR pertaining to the alleged demand of illegal gratification by the Principal of the College is of no worth. In my opinion, as no such allegations have been made in this petition. Not that such bald allegations would be of any consequence. Mere lodging of an FIR is not determinative of the authenticity of allegations which need investigation if they make out a case of cognizable offence. There is no occasion for this Court at this stage to assume that the Principal of the College is culpable and buy the petitioners'' story of their short attendance being occasioned by their righteousness in not complying with the demand for illegal gratification. Such allegations can be quite fashionable as a last desperate resort to find some sympathy and succor.

Consequently I find no force in the petition. Accordingly dismissed. It is however expected that FIR No. 270/2014 purportedly lodged against the Principal of the College for demanding illegal gratification would be expeditiously investigated recording the statement/s of the complainant/s/informant/s within six months and taking into consideration the other evidences available. And in the event Principal of the College is found guilty action be taken against him. Contrarily if the FIR is found to be false the SHO/Superintendent of Police concerned is directed to initiate proceedings against the complainant/s/informant/s under section 182 Cr.P.C and take them to their logical conclusion for the reason that false allegations need as much attention and punishment as does an offence.