Skip to content


Y. Muralikrishnan Vs. the Bangalore University and ors. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectConstitution
CourtKarnataka High Court
Decided On
Case NumberWrit Petition No. 41495 of 1982
Judge
Reported inAIR1983Kant230
ActsConstitution of India - Article 226
AppellantY. Muralikrishnan
RespondentThe Bangalore University and ors.
Appellant AdvocateJanardhana and Janardhana, Adv.
Respondent AdvocateN.D. Naidu, Govt. Pleader and ;A.J. Sadashiva, Adv.
Excerpt:
.....in the second year examinations held by the aforementioned board of intermediate education, andhra pradesh the petitioner has secured 50% in the aggregate as well as the minimum required in the three optional subjects. 7. aggrieved by the same, he has approached this court for relief inter alia contending that the university having declared that the examinations held in andhra pradesh as equivalent to the two year pre university examination in karnataka state, it had no reason whatsoever to disapprove the admission made by the college as he fulfilled the eligibility requirement. if that is conceded, and having regard to the regulations made by the intermediate education board in andhra pradesh that there shall be only one public examination at the end of the second year, the..........andhra pradesh. he has obtained marks as follows in the relevant optional subjects in the second year examination:mathematics: 35 out of 100. physics (theory): 17 out of 35. chemistry (theory): 23 out of 35. physics (practical): 19 out of 30. chemistry (practical): 24 out of 30.it does not require any detailed calculation to see that prima facie in the optional subjects in the second year examinations held by the aforementioned board of intermediate education, andhra pradesh the petitioner has secured 50% in the aggregate as well as the minimum required in the three optional subjects.5. by notification dated 28-4-1979 the respondent bangalore university by a circular informed all the colleges within its jurisdiction the equivalent examinations recognized by it corresponding to two year.....
Judgment:
ORDER

1. This petition is disposed of at the stage of preliminary hearing after notice to the respondents and after hearing the counsel for the parties.

2. The petition is directed by a student Y. Muralikrishna against the action of the first respondent-Bangalore University in Withholding the results of his performance at the first year B. E. Degree Examination held in the month of Aug., 1982 by the University. The petitioner is the student of Sri Siddartha Institute of Technology, Kunigai Road, Maralur, Tumkur. He joined that Institute, which is a private educational institution, on payment of Capitation Fee prescribed by that Institute/College and was not one of those students selected by the Selection Committee constituted by the Government of Karnataka in that behalf. The State is the third respondent.

3. The Regulations framed by the University for the 4 Year B. E. Degree Courses, among other things, provide for eligibility for admission. A student desiring to enter any Engineering College affiliated to the University is required to have passed with Physics, Chemistry and Mathematics as Optional Subjects in the two year Pre University Examination of the Karnataka State or any other examination declared as equivalent thereto by the concerned University in Karnataka. Such student should have also obtained in the aggregate not less than 50% of the aggregate maximum marks in the said three subjects in the second year Pre University Examination or in the equivalent examination.

4. The petitioner is an under-Graduate from the Andhra State having passed the Intermediate Examination held by the Board of Intermediate Education of Andhra Pradesh. He has obtained marks as follows in the relevant optional subjects in the second year examination:

Mathematics: 35 out of 100.

Physics (Theory): 17 out of 35.

Chemistry (Theory): 23 out of 35.

Physics (Practical): 19 out of 30.

Chemistry (Practical): 24 out of 30.

It does not require any detailed calculation to see that prima facie in the optional subjects in the second year examinations held by the aforementioned Board of Intermediate Education, Andhra Pradesh the petitioner has secured 50% in the aggregate as well as the minimum required in the three optional subjects.

5. By Notification dated 28-4-1979 the respondent Bangalore University by a Circular informed all the Colleges within its jurisdiction the equivalent examinations recognized by it corresponding to two year Pre University Course of Karnataka State for purpose of admission to first year Degree Course in the University during 1979-80 and onwards. The second item in that Circular is the Intermediate Examination of Andhra Pradesh. On this fact there is no dispute.

6. The petitioner was admitted to the second respondent Institute on the marks card issued by the Board of Intermediate Education of Andhra Pradesh. He has appeared for the examination also. But his results, as already stated came to be withheld for the first year on the sole ground that he did not satisfy the eligibility prescribed by the regulations of the University and therefore, his admission being imperfect, was not approved by the University and as such he was not entitled to prosecute his further studies. In the result, the benefit of his performance at the first year B. E. examination held in August 1982 was withheld.

7. Aggrieved by the same, he has approached this Court for relief inter alia contending that the University having declared that the examinations held in Andhra Pradesh as equivalent to the two year Pre University Examination in Karnataka State, it had no reason whatsoever to disapprove the admission made by the College as he fulfilled the eligibility requirement.

8. The University having entered appearance has filed its statement of objection. It is its contention that the candidate has obtained in the aggregate in the relevant optional subjects only 48.2% and not 52% of marks as claimed by the petitioner at the time of admission and therefore, the petitioner not being eligible under the regulations of the University, was not entitled to take the examination and get the benefit of it much-less get his admission approved by the University. Therefore, the only question that falls for consideration is, how to determine the average marks obtained by the candidate at the two year course of the Intermediate Examination of Andhra Pradesh?

9. It is necessary to state the method put forward by the University. The Board of Intermediate Education of Andhra Pradesh has framed regulations regarding that course. Among other things, under Part IV entitled 'public examinations' it is provided that at the end of the two year Intermediate Course a Public Examination shall be conducted by the Board of Intermediate Education. The Public Examination shall be conducted in the cities mentioned in the course of study and for the courses of both years of study. It further provides as to the various centers at which the public examination shall be held and also the supplemental examinations that will be held by the Board for those who have not passed in the first attempt, with which we are not really concerned in this case. The important thing to notice is that in the two year Intermediate Course, under the regulations of the Intermediate Education Examination Board of Andhra Pradesh, there is only one public examination conducted at the end of second year.

10. The University has proceeded on the basis having regard to the regulation made for the course of studies that there being two examinations; one held by the College at the end of the first year as a class examination and the final Public Examinations held by the Board (both) should be taken together to arrive at the average of the performance in the relevant subjects by the candidate who has offered that course of the Intermediate Education Board of Andhra Pradesh. They derive support for this view from the marks card issued by the Board which also shows the marks obtained by the candidate in the first year class examination.

11. Similarly, my attention has been drawn to the regulation regarding regarding 'Course of studies' made by the Intermediate Education Board in Andhra Pradesh. My attention has also been drawn to the total marks obtained by the student which is put down in figures and shown at 359 as against the total examinations marks of 750. It is on that basis the University contends that the student has got just a little over 48% having regard to his totality of performance in the two examinations consisting of the first year class examination and the second year public examination. This approach, in my view, is not warranted by the regulations made by the Board of Intermediate Education of Andhra Pradesh and also the regulations made by the University for prescribing eligibility for admission to the first year Degree Courses in the colleges affiliated to it.

12. As seen earlier, the eligibility for entering the first year degree Course in the University depends on the percentage of marks obtained in the aggregate at the second year examination of the Pre University Course of Karnataka State or any equivalent examination. The University does not deny that the Intermediate Examination of the Andhra Pradesh Intermediate Education Board is not equivalent to the P. U. C. examination of Karnataka State. If that is conceded, and having regard to the regulations made by the Intermediate Education Board in Andhra Pradesh that there shall be only one public examination at the end of the second year, the performance at which alone secures the student a pass or failure depending on the performance notwithstanding the fact that the student may have done very well in the class examination held by the college in the first year, the pass is declared as per regulation under the heading 'Award of Certificates'. The Certificates may be awarded to the candidates who have undergone the prescribed course of Intermediate in the college and appeared for the Intermediate public examination conducted by the Board of Intermediate Education and passed. Under the heading 'Eligibility' in the same part it is provided that a candidate shall be declared to have passed the Intermediate Education if he obtained not less than 35% of the marks in each subject in Parts. I, II, and III of the Public Examination, provided that no candidate shall be declared to have passed the examination in Part III unless he also obtains a minimum of 23 in theory and 35 in practical examination in the subjects where a practical examination is held. (Emphasis applied).

13. From the above it is clear that the candidate is required to obtain the prescribed percentage of marks for passing the Intermediate Examinations. Those marks should be obtained at the Public Examination held by the Board and not any other examination. If that is borne in mind, as evidenced by the marks card in regard to which there is no dispute between the University and the candidate-petitioner, the petitioner satisfies all the requirements for obtaining a declaration of pass under the regulation made by the Board of Intermediate Education in Andhra Pradesh . Then, the only question is, whether the respondent University has any authority to construe that regulation in the manner to include the performance of the candidate in the first year of the two years Intermediate Course of Board of Intermediate Education of Andhra Pradesh, as claimed by it. Prima facie that claim appears to me, apart from being without jurisdiction, totally uncalled for even according to the regulation framed by the University for the eligibility for entering the first year degree course. The emphasis in the regulation for the prescribed eligibility for entrance to first year degree course is on the aggregate marks obtained in the examination of the second year of the P. U. C. or its equivalent. If that is so, it is unthinkable how the University can withhold its approval of the admission of the petitioner who has in the second year examination secured in the aggregate 50% of the marks in the relevant optional subjects.

14. For the reason stated above, there is no jurisdiction for the University either to disapprove his admission or on that ground withhold the result of the petitioner who has appeared for the first year B. E. Degree Examination through the second respondent College.

15. In the result, for the reasons I have given above, the petitioner must succeed and rule accordingly will issue be made absolute.

16. The first respondents University is directed to accord approval of the student's admission to the second respondent College as well as publish the result of his performance in the first year B. E. Degree Examination held by the University in Aug., 1982.

17. Petitioner has been permitted to attend the high classes by virtue of an interim order made by this Court and that remains undisturbed.

18. There will be no order as to costs in the circumstances of the case.

19. Learned Government Pleader is permitted to file his memo of appearance within two weeks.

20. Petition allowed.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //