Skip to content


Vijay Pal Singh Vs. Vice Chancellor, Mahatma Jyoti-ba-phuley Roohelkhand University, Bareilly and Another - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectConstitution
CourtAllahabad High Court
Decided On
Case NumberC.M.W.P. No. of 17652 of 1999
Judge
Reported in1999(4)AWC3267; (2000)2UPLBEC1170
ActsUttar Pradesh State Universities Act, 1973 - Sections 1 (3); Constitution of India - Article 226; Uttar Pradesh Intermediate Education Act, 1921; Uttar Pradesh Intermediate Education (Amendment) Act, 1996
AppellantVijay Pal Singh
RespondentVice Chancellor, Mahatma Jyoti-ba-phuley Roohelkhand University, Bareilly and Another
Appellant Advocate A.K. Goyal, Adv.
Respondent Advocate S.C. and ;S.N. Srivastava, Adv.
Excerpt:
.....- section 1 (3) of u. p. state universities act, 1973 - petitioner appeared for b.a part-i examination - result not declared by the university - doubt over the eligibility and degree of the petitioner - action of the university has to be rational - probe to be held in the matter - held, university to decide the relevant issue by reasoned order within two months. (ii) result declaration - article 226 of constitution of india - majority of students hail from rural areas and are deprived of proper legal advice - others are unable to reach court promptly for redressal of their grievances due to financial and other constraints - court has to consider these facts while deciding acceptance of petition. - - 2. at the outset, i would like to record that writ petition does not explain..........a recognized institution or purva madhyama given by vaidic vidyapith, badaun. is equivalent to the high school.' as demonstrated above question of 'recognition of the . institution' was never in dispute or at least there was no enquiry on that point by the university. apparently allegations in this respect in the counter-affidavit have been made to confuse or mislead the court. no reliance can be placed on the contents of said para 16 of the counter-affidavit, as they have not been sworn on record. the university has not pleaded various aspects and facts--(e.g. mode of submitting representation not disclosed nor there is reference of earlier representation in the subsequent ones, etc.) to substantiate that it did not receive representations.7. petitioner passed poorva madhyama with.....
Judgment:

A. K. Yog, J.

1. Vijay Pal Singh, petitioner has filed this petition under Article 226, Constitution of India, praying a writ of mandamus commanding Vice Chancellor to release his marks sheet of B. A. Part 1-1997 Examination ; photostat of which has been filed as Annexure-1 to the writ petition.

2. At the outset, I would like to record that writ petition does not explain laches. The petitioner alleges that he filed certain representations before respondent No. 1. These averments do not inspire confidence.

3. A counsel is under professional obligation both to the client and to the Court. Since counsel for the petitioner is relatively a junior advocate, I restrict myself by observing that he did not appear before Court either on 30.8.99 or 31.8.99.

4. There is no explanation why petitioner obtained certificate dated 7.8.1997 counter signed by Inspector Sanskrit Pathshahala, U. P. Allahabad on 29th September. 1997 (Annexure-6 to writ petltion-P. P. 24 of the writ paper book). There is no explanation why petitioner obtained said certificate-signed by 'Ved Vrat Arya' Acharya-on 28.9.93 which is the date of mark sheet of Poorva Madhyma (Annexure-1 to writ petition-PP 14 of writ paper book). Petitioner has not disclosed the 'post office' the date when it is dispatched. No postal receipt is filed to support said averment. Moreover when University had sent letter dated 12.9,97 of Registered post. Petitioner should have also sent representations by registered post. Admittedly no representation is said to have been sent by Registered post. The pleadings in writ petition are halfhearted made in slip-shod manner.

5. This Court, however, cannot ignore the fact that large number of students hall from rural area and are deprived of proper legal advice andlarge number of students are not in position to approach 'Court' promptly for 'redressal of grievances' due to financial stringencies or otherwise.

6. in para 16 of the counter-affidavit--(sworn on personal knowledge), a faint denial is made to the representations made from time to time by petitioner. Para 16 of the counter-affidavit reads '...... Theseapplications have been appears to be fabricated for the purpose of the present writ petition but he did not file a single document to show the real question whether the institution is a recognized institution or Purva Madhyama given by Vaidic Vidyapith, Badaun. Is equivalent to the High School.' As demonstrated above question of 'recognition of the . Institution' was never in dispute or at least there was no enquiry on that point by the University. Apparently allegations in this respect in the counter-affidavit have been made to confuse or mislead the Court. No reliance can be placed on the contents of said para 16 of the counter-affidavit, as they have not been sworn on record. The University has not pleaded various aspects and facts--(e.g. mode of submitting representation not disclosed nor there is reference of earlier representation in the subsequent ones, etc.) to substantiate that it did not receive representations.

7. Petitioner passed Poorva Madhyama with English (equivalent to High School) and he was Issued marks sheet dated 28th August, 1993 (Annexure-1 to the writ petition). He was allowed to appear in the Intermediate Examination held by U. P. High School and Intermediate Examination Board (U. P. Board, Allahabad) ; photocopy of Intermediate marks-sheet has been filed as Annexure-2 to the petition. His Intermediate mark-sheet and certificate were duly released and on that basis petitioner duly applied and got admission in the B. A. course conducted by Mahatma Jyoti-Ba-Phuley, Roohelkhand University, Bareilly.

8. According to the petitioner, he was admitted to the B.A. I.pursued studies and on that basis applied for appearing in the B.A.-1 final examination. He was allowed to appear in B.A. 1 examination (copy of admission card filed as Annexure-3 to the writ petition). Perusal of it shows that 'temporary permission' for appearing in the Examination was given and it was mentioned that Examination was liable to be cancelled in case any mistake in furnishing information was detected at any stage. Petitioner appeared in the B.A.-I final Examination. 1997 but his result has not been declared by the University.

9. From the documents annexed along with counter-affidavit of the University, it appears that Registrar of the University vide letter dated 29th May. 1997 (Annexure-CA-2 to the University counter-affidavit) made enquiries from U. P. Board's Regional Office regarding Poorva Madhyama certificate being recognised as equivalent to the High School Examination conducted by U. P. Board. Reply to the enquiry is endorsed vide note dated 31.8.1997 (purported to be on behalf of Regional Secretary. Secondary Education Board. Regional Office, Bareilly). University mentioned in its letter dated 29th May. 1997 [Annexure-CA-2) that certain regular and private candidates, who have applied to the University, claim to have passed Intermediate Examination from U. P. Board after doing Class X fromcertain institutions (including Vaidik Vidyapith Badaun, i.e., the institution from where petitioner claimed to havepassed Poorva Madhyama examination) and there is no mention of eligibility of such candidates inU. P. intermediate Education Act,1921 and Amended Act 1996 forappearing in Inter Exam.Endorsement on the letter reads-'orlglnal letter is being returned withinformation that course conducted byinstitutions mentioned in the letterunder reply is not recognisedequivalent to the High SchoolExamination of U. P. IntermediateEducation Board.

10. in the said reply there is no mention that Vaidlc Vidyaplth,Badaun. was not a recognised Institution nor 'query' to this effect was made by the University in its letter dated 29th May, 1997 (Annexure-CA-2).

11. The contesting University has attempted to Justify its action by fling minutes of Academic Council Meeting dated 8th March, 1990 (confirmed by the Executive Council in its meeting held on 28th March, 1990). Perusal of the Minutes of Academic Council, referred to above, (Annexure-C.A. 1) shows that Item No. 18 which alone is relevant for the present case only provides certain Examination and Degrees awarded by Hindi Sahitya Sammelan and Jamia Urdu Academy, Aligarh, will not be entertained unless Government Notification regarding their recognition is received. Examination of Poorva Madhyama conducted by Sarnpurna Nand Sanskrit Vishwa Vidyala (incorporated under Section 1 (3) of U. P. State Universities Act, 1973) U. P. Act No. 10 of 1973) is not at all referred to or dealt with in the said minutes. Averments in para 5 of the counter-affidavit are thus against the contents of Minutes (Annexure-C.A.-1). 'Degree of Central Board of Higher Education, New Delhi' referred to in para 5 of counter-affidavit has no reference in Annexure-CA-2. Para 5 of the C.A. Is sworn of Legal Advice. This shows University got counter-affidavit filed-in a slip-shod manner.

12. There is no averment in the counter-affidavit that there is some other resolution of the Academic Council and/or Executive Council in this respect. Again, in the counter-affidavit there is no averment that there is any other ordinance, which prohibits aforesaid 'Poorva Madhyama' be treated as equivalent to High School. In para 11 of counter-affidavit, it is alleged that temporary admission was given to the petitioner to appear in B.A.-I because he had not submitted mark-sheet of High School and petitioner appeared in B.A.-I examination on the basis of Temporary Admission'. This para is sworn on personal knowledge and not on record.

Matter of General Importance--Court to Issue Directions.

13. Matter pertaining to the recognition to Poorva Madhyama Examination' equivalent to 'High School Examination' concerns large number of students, it will be appropriate to refer to the provision of Education Code of U. P.--1958 (Revised Edition) corrected up to 31st December. 1962 published by Secretary to Government Education Department, U. P. Relevant paras 73 and 74 are reproduced below :

'73. After the coming into force of the Varanaseya Sanskrit Vishva Vidayala Act and the inauguration of the Vishwa Vidayala on March 22, 1958. the responsibility of Sanskrit studies has been entirely taken over by the Vishva Vidayala. The Government Sanskrit College. Varanasi and the Saraswatt Bhavan Library have merged in the Vishva Vidayataya and the functions so far discharged by the Board of Sanskrit Studies and Registrar of Sanskrit College Examinations have also vested in the Vishva Vldayalaya. Cases of recognition of Sanskrit Pathshalas will be governed by the conditions of affiliation prescribed in the Statutes of the Vishva Vidayala Government grant which was previously given to Sanskrit Pathsatas on the recommendation of the Grant-in-aid Sub-Committee of the Board of Sanskrit Studies will now be given the same manner as grant-in-atd to Colleges associated or affiliated to any other University.

74. The Prathama. Purva Madhyama (with English). Uttar Madhyama (with English), and Shastri (with English) examinations conducted by the Government Sanskrit College, Varanasi prior, to its merger in the Vishva Vldayalaya are recognised by Government as equivalent, respectively, to Junior High School (Class VIII), High School Examination of the Intermediate Board, Intermediate Examination of the Intermediate Board, and B.A. Degree of any University established by law in Uttar Pradesh, for purposes of appointment to posts underGovernment, and for admission to Training and Technical institutions maintained or controlled by Government.'

14. Reference may be made to the para 981 of Chapter 136 of Manual of Government Orders Revised Edition 1981. The relevant para 981 is reproduced below :

'981. Degrees and Diplomas.--Government have decided that the following examinations should be considered as equivalent to the academic qualification prescribed in the rules for purposes of recruitment to services and posts under the State Government : (a) As far as the Degree examination are concerned, a candidate for recruitment must hold a degree of a University established by law in Uttar Pradesh. or any other University recognised for this purpose by the Governor of Uttar Pradesh.

(b) Where Intermediate Examination held by the Board of High School and Intermediate Education, Uttar Pradesh, has been prescribed, the following examinations will be regarded for purpose of recruitment as equivalent thereto :

(1) Intermediate Examinationin Commerce of the Boardof High School andintermediate Education,Uttar Pradesh(Commercial Diploma).

2) Intermediate Examination in Agriculture.

(3) Intermediate Examination of the Hindu University, Varanasi.

(4) Intermediate Examination of the Muslim University, Aligarh.

(5) Senior Diploma of the Mayo College. Ajmer.

(6) Cambridge Higher School Certificate Examination.

(7) Other Madhyama (with English) of theGovernment Sanskrit College. Varanasi.

(8) Intermediate Examination of the AJmer Board.

(c) Where a High School Examination of the Board of High School and Intermediate Education. Uttar Pradesh. Is prescribed, the following examination will be regarded as equivalent thereto for purposes of recruitment :

(1) Admission examination of the Varanasi HinduUniversity.

(2) Cambridge SchoolCertificate Examinationprovided a student haspassed in five of suchsubjects as are recognisedfor the High SchoolExamination of the Boardof High School andIntermediate Education,Uttar Pradesh.

(3) Diploma Examination of the Royal Indian Military College, Dehra Dun. so long as the syllabus and the standard of the examination continue to be the same, as those of Diploma Examination of the Chiefs College.

(4) The Indian Army Special Certificate of Education.

(5) High School Examinationof the Muslim University, Aligarh.

(6) High School Examination of the Ajmer Board in the case of those students who happen to take the examination of the Ajmer Board but who are of the U. P. domicile.

(7) Poorva Madhyama (withEnglish) of GovernmentSanskrit College,Varanasi.'

15. Government Sanskrit Colleges and Sanskrit Bhawan Library got merged under Varanaseya SanskritVishva Vidyalay Act w.e.i. 22nd March, . 1958. Later Sampurnanand Sanskrit Vishva Vidyalay was Incorporated under U. P. State Universities Act, 1973. U. P. Act No. 10 of 1973 which became responsible for conducting Sanskrit Education through various Institution in the State of U. P. For this purpose, reference may be made to Chapter 14 of the Regulations framed by the U. P. Board contained in Niyam Sangrah 1983-88' amended up to June 1991, published by U. P. Board wherein the examinations earlier held by Government Sanskrit College and Varanaseya Sanskrit Vishva Vidyalaya are duly recognised.

16. In absence of relevant enquiry and categorical finding that 'Vaidic Vldyapeeth Badaun, was recognised institution at relevant time or that 'Poorva Madhyama' was recognised equivalent to the 'High School Examination' of by U. P. Board, impugned action of the University cannot be Justified.

17. University (Respondent No. 1) is expected to take decision after holding a reliable authentic probe in the matter. Information ought to be collected from an official or authority was competent to furnish such information. i.e., Chairman, Secretary. U. P. Board only.

18. I direct the University to decide the relevant issues by reasoned order within two months of the receipt of this Judgment, provided a certified copy is filed before the University within one month from today. Decision of Enquiry shall be communicated to the petitioner by Registered A. D. Post at the address mentioned by him in the representation filed with certified copy of the Judgment. Declaration of Petitioner's result of B. A.-I 1997 Examination will be subject to the result of the enquiry and consequent decision to be taken by the University.

19. Writ petition fails and is dismissed subject to the observations/directions contained in the judgment.


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