AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
M.I. Arun, J
Petitioner No.1 – College is offering course of B.Ed and petitioner No.2 – College is offering course of both B.Ed as well as M.Ed and both the Colleges are affiliated to the second respondent – University.
Petitioner No.1 – College admitted respondent Nos.3 and 4 for the course of B.Ed for the academic year 2021-2022 and petitioner No.2 – College admitted respondent Nos.5 to 33 for the course of B.Ed for the academic year 2021-2022 and respondent Nos.34 to 44 for the course of M.Ed for the academic year 2021-22. As the said admissions were not recognized by the second respondent – University, the instant writ petition is filed.
The case of the petitioners is that the admissions of respondent Nos.3 to 44 have been made before the cut-off date, is within the sanctioned intake of petitioner Nos.1 and 2 – Colleges and the said students are eligible to be admitted for the course that they have been admitted. However, it is submitted that due to reasons beyond the control of the petitioners – Colleges, the details of their admissions could not be uploaded on the portal of the second respondent – University, which resulted in their admissions not being approved.
Per contra, the second respondent – University submits that no details are forthcoming as to the admissions of respondent Nos.3 to 44 by the petitioners – Colleges and as the details of respondent Nos.3 to 44 have not been provided for by the petitioners – Colleges, their admissions are not approved and that they have approached the University after the completion of first semester and for that reason, it is prayed that the writ petition be dismissed.
Admittedly, the petitioners have not submitted necessary details of respondent Nos.3 to 44 to the second respondent – University within time and for that reason, no fault can be attributed to the second respondent – University.
It is a clear case where the petitioners have been negligent and it amounts to playing with the lives of the students and also the system. However, given the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, it is not correct to make respondent Nos.3 to 44 suffer for the fault of petitioners – Colleges. It would be appropriate to direct the second respondent – University to consider the case of respondent Nos.3 to 44, if their admissions are before the cut-off date prescribed by the second respondent – University, is within the sanctioned intake of the petitioners – Colleges and they are otherwise eligible to be admitted for their respective courses. At the same time, it is not appropriate to leave the petitioners go scot-free for the mistake done by them. Hence, the following:-
ORDER
i. Petitioners shall submit details of respondent Nos.3 to 44 to the second respondent – University forthwith.
ii. The second respondent – University shall consider the case of the petitioners and respondent Nos.3 to 44 in accordance with law and if it is found that the admissions of the respondent Nos.3 to 44 were done before the cut-off date, and their admissions are within the sanctioned intake of the petitioner – Colleges and that they are eligible to be admitted to the course, their admissions will be approved.
iii. Petitioner No.1 shall pay cost of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) to the second respondent – University and petitioner No.2 shall pay cost of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Lakhs only) to the second respondent – University.
iv. Pending consideration of the admissions and the eligibility to write the examination which will have to be decided by the second respondent –University, respondent Nos.3 to 44 shall be permitted to appear in B.Ed and M.Ed examinations, as the case may be, which is scheduled to commence from 25.07.2022.
v. Writ petition is disposed of accordingly.