1. This petition is squarely covered by the single Bench judgment of this Court in CWP No. 149 of 1989 (Bhupinderjeet v. Punjab University, Chandigarh, and another) allowed on 21st March, 1989 by which the admission granted to the petitioner in that case, who had passed the Intermediate Examination from Bihar Pradesh Shiksha Parishad Shripalpur, Patna (Bihar) was held to be in order. He was allowed to appear in the subsequent examinations of the Punjab University and the Punjab University was directed to declare the result of the petitioner of B.Sc. Part II (Medical), so as to enable him to seek admission in B.Sc. Part III.
2. In the present case also, the petitioners, passed 10 + 2 Examination conducted by the Bihar Pradesh Shiksha Parishad Shripalpur, Patna. On that basis they were granted admission to B.A. Part II by Layalpur Khalsa College, Jalandhar, in July, 1987, and they appeared in the said examination held in April, 1988 but somehow respondent Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar, withheld the result of the petitioners as it transpired that even though Bihar Pradesh Shiksha Parishad Shripalpur, Patna, had been recognised by the other Universities but the same had not been recognised by Guru Nanak Dev University. The petitioners represented to the respondent University and brought it its notice that a number of other candidates like them have already appeared in various examinations through colleges affiliated to Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar, and their results had since been declared. The withholding of the result of the petitioners, according to them, was an act of discrimination and arbitrariness when they had already been granted admission in the said college and on that basis they had already submitted their admission forms along with fees, etc. and had actually appeared in the annual examinations of the University after attending classes for whole of the session. Ultimately on 25th January, 1989, the respondent University directed the Principals of the affiliated Colleges to remove the names of the students who had passed 10 + 2 Examination from Bihar Pradesh Shiksha Parishad Shripalpur, Patna, and those holding certificate awarded by Varanaseya Sanskrit University, Varanasi. Aggrieved by the aforesaid decision of the respondent University, the petitioners approached this Court by way of writ petition. The motion bench, by their order dated 1st March, 1989, as an interim measure, allowed the petitioners to continue to attend the classes and to take the examinations held by the University. By virtue of that, the petitioners have been attending the classes and appeared in the next examinations.
3. The respondent University has filed its return in which it has tried to justify its action on the ground that it was under some misconception arising out of the name of the Parishad, that is, Bihar Pradesh Shiksha Parishad Shripalpur, Patna, that the students passing out 10 + 2 Examination of the said Parishad had been held eligible for admission to B.A. Part II Examination of the Guru Nanak Dev University. Otherwise being a non-statutory body, the Parishad was not as such recognised by the University. Same is the position with regard to the other institution known as Varanaseya Sanskrit University, Varanasi.
4. After hearing the learned Counsel for the parties and having gone through the; material on the record, I find that the writ petition deserves to be allowed. Whatever may be the controversy with regard to the recognition or otherwise of the aforesaid two institutions of Bihar, the fact stands that the petitioners were granted admission as far back as July, 1987 and they appeared in B.A. Part II Examination in 1988, after their admission forms, deposit of fees, etc. were found to be in order by the respondent University, and the University had issued regular roll numbers for appearing in the examination. It would be too late in the day to permit the University to consider the candidature of the petitioners as irregular on a ground which was in existence much before the petitioners appeared in the examination. It was in these very circumstances that J.V. Gupta, J. (as his Lordship then was) in Bhupinderjeet's case (supra), allowed the petition, and the concluding para of the judgment is reproduced below:--
'It will not be out of place to mention here that if the petitioner had been told at the very outset that he was not eligible for admission in Guru Gobind Singh College, Chandigarh, he could seek his admission in Punjabi University, Patiala, or elsewhere where that degree was recognised, but now after having completed the course of B.Sc. Part II and after appearing in the examination, he should not be told now that he was not eligible for admission. As observed earlier, it is a clearcase of negligence on the part of the Principal/Staff of the College for not furnishing the correct information to the University.
'Consequently, this petition succeeds; the impugned order dated 27th December, 1988, Annexure P.7, is quashed and the respondents are directed to declare the result of the petitioner of B.Sc. Part II (Medical) held in Session 1987-88 under Roll No. 25793 immediately within a fortnight so as to enable him to seek admission in B.Sc. Part III.'
For arriving at this conclusion, the learned Judge placed reliance on Harinder Kaur Chandok v. The Punjab School Education Board, AIR 1988 Punj & Har 244, which has since been upheld by the Division Bench of this Court.
5. To be fair to the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar, it may be noticed that while vehemently opposing the writ petition reliance was also placed by the learned Counsel on the Division Bench judgment of this Court in CWP No. 11096 of 1988 (Rajinder Singh Sohal v. G.N.D.U. Amritsar etc.), delivered on 25th January, 1989. In that case, admission was secured by a candidate by misrepresenting that he belonged to rural area, even though he did not fulfil the condition. The Division Bench while accepting the petition of another candidate genuinely belonging to rural area, ordered the grant of admission to him in place of the candidate who had secured admission by misrepresentation of facts. In that case, the stand of the University itself was that since admission had been finalised in August, 1988, the grant of admission to the writ petitioner, that is, the candidate belonging genuinely to the rural area, would not be possible. The learned Judges constituting the Bench, allowed the writ petition and directed the University to admit the petitioner forthwith. That case has nothing to do with the present one as in the instant case the petitioners applied for admission to B. A. Part II a course on the basis of the examination passed by them from the aforesaid institution at Patna, rightly under the belief that the examination passed by them had been recognised by Guru Nanak DevUniversity, Amritsar, as had already been done by various other Universities in the country. Not only that even the Principal of the college as well as the respondent University were also under the same belief and after granting admission to the petitioners further permitted them to attend the classes. Now, after a year and a half it would be wholly unfair and unjust to the poor students to remove their names from the rolls of the College and to permit the University to withhold their result.
6. Consequently, the writ petition is allowed and by issuing a writ of mandamus, the respondent University is directed to declare the result of the petitioners of the examinations in which they have appeared, forthwith. However, there shall be no order as to costs.
7. Petition allowed.