Skip to content


University of Rajasthan and anr. Vs. Pankaj Rani Bajaj and ors. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectConstitution
CourtRajasthan High Court
Decided On
Case NumberS.B. Civil Second Appeal No. 445 of 1973
Judge
Reported in1973(6)WLN955
AppellantUniversity of Rajasthan and anr.
RespondentPankaj Rani Bajaj and ors.
DispositionAppeal dismissed
Cases ReferredPatna v. K.S. Raman
Excerpt:
ordinances of university of rajasthan - order 88a (1)(i)--candidate passing 2nd year examination but not clearing compulsory subjects--held, she is entitled to be admitted to final year tdc.;order 86a (2)(i) also contemplates that a candidate who has passed the second year tdc examination but has not cleared the compulsory subjects shall be entitled to get admission to the final year tdc class only after he has cleared the compulsory subject or subjects as the case may be by availing the chances prescribed by the said provision.;such a candidate will not be deprived of prosecuting his studies for passing final year tdc class, provided he clears the compulsory subject(s) by availing the chances granted by the said provisipn. but if he fails to clear the compulsory subjects even after..........history of indian civilization and culture/elementary mathematics elementary biology in the first year examination will be allowed to continue his studies in the second year class provided he passes in all the optional subjects offered in the first year examination. such a candidate will have to clear the compulsory subjects in which he failed at the first year examination in the immediately following three (main and supplementary examinations) and will be allowed to join the final year class only after he has cleared all the compulsory subjects. if a candidate passes the second year examination but again fails to clear the compulsory subject (s) his result of second year will be withheld and released only after he has passed in all the compulsory subjects. such a candidate shall be.....
Judgment:

C.M. Lodha, J.

1. This appeal involves interpretation of certain Ordinances of the University of Rajasthan and arises out of the following facts. The respondent-plaintiff Pankaj Rani passed her First Year T.D.C. Examination in Science (Biology) from the University of Jodhpur in the year 1970-71, with two compulsory subjects General English and Genetal Hindi. Thereafter she sought admission to Second Year T.D.C in Maharani's College, Jaipur affiliated to the University of Rajasthan, Jaipur and appeared at the Second Year T.D.C. Examination of that University in 1972. However, she did not pass & was required to appear at a supplementary examination in Zoology, Accordingly she appeared at the Supplementary Examination in that subject but her result was withheld, as, according to Ordinance 218 of the Rajasthan University it was necessary for her to pass in one more compulsory subject prescribed for First Year T.D.C. Examination. As already stated above, Pankaj Rani had only two compulsory subjects when she passed the First Year T.D.C. Examination of the University of Jodhpur. Even though her result of the Second Year T.D.C Examination was not declared, yet she was admitted to the Triad Year T.D.C. Class of the Maharam's College. When the fact of her admisson to Third Year T.D.C Class came to the knowledge of the University Authorities, a letter dated 27-10-1972 marked Ex. 1 was addressed to Pankaj Rani informing her that since she had failed to clear one additional compulsory subject, her result of Second Year T.D.C Examination had been withheld and that she was not eligible for admission to the Final Year T.D.C class. On receipt of the letter, the plaintiff apprehended that her admission may be cancelled, and consequently she filed the present suit in the Court of Munsiff (East), Jaipur City, Jaipur on 30-10-1972 praying that a mandatory injunction be issued against the University of Rajasthan directing the latter to allow the plaintiff to appear at the Third Year T.D.C. Examination of 1973.

2. The suit was resisted by the defendants the University of Rajasthan, its Vice-Chancellor, its Registrar and the Director. Maharam's College, who pleaded inter alia that according to the Ordinances of the University the plaintiff was not entitled to get admission to Third Year, T.D.C class unless the had cleared the Additional Compulsory subject.

3. At this stage it may be relevant to point out that during the pendency of the suit the plaintiff was allowed to continue her studies in Third Year TDC Examination and was also allowed to appear at the Additional Complusory Subject, namely, Elementary Mathematics in pursuance of the directions of the Court. She was declared as having passed in the Additional Compulsory subject Her result of the Second Year T DC. Examination was also declared. She was declared successful. She was also allowed to appear at the Final Year T.D.C Examination in the year 1973 but the result was not declared. However, at the time of disposal of the stay application by this Court my learned brother Kan Singh J; before whom the stay application was listed for disposal directed the University to permit the respondent to join M.A Classes and also to fill in the form for the next M.A Part 1 Examination. This interim order was passed on information supplied by the learned Counsal for the University regarding the result of the plaintiff's Third Year T.D.C Examining. Thus even though the plaintiff's result of Third Year T.D.C Examination has not been formally declared there is no room for doubt that she has passed the same. This is not denied by the learned Counsel for the University. I have made mention of all these developments during the pendency of this litigation purposely as they have undoubtedly affected my mind in arriving at the conclusion which I shall presently state.

4. Now coming to the merits of the case learned Counsel for the University has urged that Ordinance 86A(1)(i) has been erroneously interpreted by both the lower courts and in order to lend force to his submission he has further referred to Order 86A(5) (i), Order 87, and note 4 to Order 218. In order to to appreciate the point, it would be proper to reproduce in extenso the aforesaid provisions:

Order 86A(1) A candidate who after passing the First B.E. Examination of the University or the Intermediate Examination/First Year T.D.C. Examination of a Statutory Board/University recognised for the purpose by the syndicate, seeks admission to the Second Year T.D.C. Class in an affiliated college may be admitted to the said class subject to the following conditions:

(i) He shall be required to pass in the compulsory subjects prescribed for the First Year T.D.C. Examination of the University if he has not already passed in the same at the qualifying examination. If he passes the Second Year T.D C. Examination but fails to clear the compulsory subject(s) either at the main or at the immediately following supplementary Examination, his result of Second Year T.D.C. Examination will be with held. Such a candidate shall be allowed two more chances to clear the failing compulsory subject (s) at the immediately following Main and Supplementary Examination and allowed admission to the Final Year T.D.C. Class, provided that if he fails to clear them even in these two chances (inability to avail a chance shall be treated as failure), his Second Year T.D.C. Examination shall stand cancelled.

(5) (i) Candidates who appeared at the First Year T.D.C. Examination and/or Core/ Optional subjects under the aforesaid provision shall not be promoted to the Final Year T.D.C Class until they have passed the First Year T.D.C Examination in the required compulsory and/or Core/Optional subject and (ii) the attendance of such candidates as passed in the required Compulsory and/or Core/Optional subjects at the supplementary examination will be counted from the date of their admission but not later than a week from the date of declaration of the supplementary examination result,

Order 87. A student who has not been allowed promotion shall not be admitted into a higher class in another college.

Order 218 Note 4: A candidate failing in any or all the compulsory subjects viz. General Hindi, General English and General Education/ History of Indian Civilization and Culture/Elementary Mathematics Elementary Biology in the First Year Examination will be allowed to continue his studies in the Second Year Class provided he passes in all the optional subjects offered in the First Year Examination. Such a candidate will have to clear the compulsory subjects in which he failed at the First Year Examination in the immediately following three (Main and Supplementary Examinations) and will be allowed to join the Final Year class only after he has cleared all the compulsory subjects. If a candidate passes the Second Year Examination but again fails to clear the Compulsory subject (s) his result of Second Year will be withheld and released only after he has passed in all the compulsory subjects. Such a candidate shall be allowed two further chances to clear the failing compulsory subject (s) at the immediately following Main & Supplementary Examinations and allowed admission to the Final Year T.D.C Class, provided that if he fails to clear them even in these two chances (inability to avail a chance shall be treated as failure), his First Year and Second Year T.D.C Examinations shall stand cancelled.

5. The learned District Judge has while interpreting Order 86A(1) (i) observed as follows:

The following wordings:

Such a candidate shall be allowed two more chances...and allowed admission to the Final Year T.D.C Class.

are explicit and admit of no two interpretations. It clearly provides for provisional admission to the Final Year T.D.C and if such a candidate fails to clear the compulsory subject in two chances given to him/her, his/her Second Year T.D.C. Examination stands cancelled. Naturally, therefore, higher provisional admission to the Final Year T.D C. will not help him/her, but it cannot in any manner disentile him/her from prosecuting her/his studies of the Final Year T.D.C and getting him/her result declared. She entails the disqualification only if she fails to clear the compulsory subject by availing the chances available to him/her I, therefore, find no force in the submission of the learned Counsel for the appellants.

With all respect to the learned District Judge I have not been able to follow the logic behind the conclusion arrived at by the learned Judge in the passage reproduced above.

6. However, on a careful reading of Order 86A(1)(i) it becomes crystal clear that a cardidate who after passing First Year T.D.C Examination of a Satutory Board/University recognised by the Syndicate has not passed the compulsory subjects prescribed for the first year T.D.C Examination of the University, after availing the full chances prescribed therein, shall not be eligible for appearing at the Final Year T.D.C. Glass even though he may have passed the Second Year T.D.C Examination, and his Second Year T.D. C Examination shall stand cancelled So far as this proposition goes there is no dispute between the parties. The point of dispute is that according to the learned Counsel for the University, a candidate who may have passed Second Year T.D.C Examination but who has not cleared the compulsory subjects is not entitled even to be admitted to the Final Year T.D.C. Class. On the other hand the contention on behalf of the plaintiff-respondent is that a candidate who has passed his Second Year T.D.C Examination but has not cleared the three compulsory subjects, is entitled to get admission to the Final Year T.D.C Class and thereafter take chance to clear the compulsory subjects before appearing at the Final Year T.D.C Examination.

7. At this juncture reference may be made to the language of Order 86A (5)(i) which leaves no room for doubt that candidates who appeared at the First Year T.D.C. Examination of the University (meaning the University of Rajasthan) in the compulsory...subjects...shall not be promoted to the Final Year T.D.C. Class until they have passed First Year T.D.C Examination in the required compulsory...subject. The contention on behalf of the respondent, however, is that this provision applies to those candidates who had appeared at the First Year T.D.C. Examination of the University of Rajasthan and has no application to the candidates passing First Year T.D.C Examination of other recognised Universities.

8. After giving my careful consideration to the different interpretations put by the learned Counsel for the parties I have come to the conclusion that Order 86A (1)(i) also contemplates that a candidate who has passed the Second Year Year T.D.C Examination but has not cleared the compulsory subjects shall be entitled to get admission to the Final Year T.D.C Class only after he has cleared the compulsory subject or subjects as the case may be by availing the chances prescribed by the said provision. My reasons for coming to this conclusion are as follows:

(1) The aforesaid interpretation would harmonise Order 86A(1)(i) and Order 86A(5)(i) but a different interpretation would result in unreasonable discrimination against the candidates passing first year T.D. C Examination from the University of Rajasthan itself.

(ii) Order 86A(1)(i) provides that the result of Second Year T.D.C Examination of a candidate shall be withheld unless he has cleared the compulsory subjects prescribed for the First Year T.D.C Examination of the University If the University is entitled to withhold the result of the Second Year T.D.C Examination, the contingency of admitting such a candidate to the Final Year T.D.C Class cannot arise.

(iii) Order 86A (1)(i) further provides that a candidate who has failed to clear the compulsory subject (s) either at the main or the immediately following supplementary examination shall be allowed two more chances to clear the failing compulsory subject(s) at the immediately following main and supplementary examination and allowed admission to the Final Year T.D. Glass. The implication of this provision is that the candidate will be allowed admission to the Final Year T.D.C Class only, after he has cleared the Compulsory subjects.

The protion underlined (in italcs) by me is implicit. This only means that such Final Year a candidate will not be deprived of prosecuting his studies for passing T.D.C Class, provided he clears the compulsory subject(s) by availing the chances granted by the said provision But if he fails to clear the compulsory subjects even after availing the two chances, his Second T.D.C Examination shall stand cancelled.

9. Assuming for argument's sake that the interpretation put by the learned Counsel for the respondent is also possible a question still arise which interpretation should be preferred.

10. In Principal, Patna College, Patna v. K.S. Raman : [1966]1SCR974 their Lordships were Pleased to observe,

Even on the merits, we think we aught to point out that where the question involved is one of interpreting a regulation framed by the Academic Council of a University, the High Court should ordinarily be reluctant to issue a writ of certiorari where it is plain that the regulation in question is capable of two constructions, and it would generally not be expedient for the High Court to reverse a decision of the educational authorities on the ground that the construction placed by the said authorities on the relevant regulation appears to the High Court less reasonable than the alternative construction which it is pleaded to accept.

11. In consonance with the aforesaid dictum, I find that the interpretation put forth by the learned Counsel for the appellant is also the inter? pretation put by the University in Note 4 to 0.218 wherein it is mentioned that:

such a candidate...will be allowed to join the Final Year Class only after he has cleared all the compulsory subjects.

12. In view of what has been stated above my conclusion is (1) : [1966]1SCR974 that the interpretation put on Order 86A(1)(1) by the courts below is not correct.

13. However, there is another aspect of the case to which I wish to address myself. Order 220A provides that a candidate who after passing the Second Year (Science) Examination of the University has attended a regular course of study in an affiliated college for one academic year shall be eligible for appearing at the Final Year (Science) Examination. According to this provision it cannot be gain said that the plaintiff was qualified for appearing at the Final Year (Science) T.D.C Examination. All that can be said against her is that she had been wrongly admitted by the authorities of the Maharani's College to Third Year T.D.C Class in contravention of Order 86A(1)(i). It is for the affiliated Colleges of the University to follow the direction regarding admission to Third Year T.D.C contained in the said provision and if it was not correctly followed, the fault lies with the affiliated college and not with the candidate who sought admission. It is not a case where the candidate has been guilty of any misconduct or any misstatement or suppression of (acts at the time of seeking admission. It is for the University to insist on strict adhernce to its directions by the affiliated colleges and if they do not follow them it is again for the University to take proper action against the affiliated colleges committing default. It may go even to the extent of disaffiliating a defaulting college. However, it cannot be said in the circumstances of the present ease that the plaintiff was not eligible for appearing at the Final Year T.D.C Examination as per Order 220A. In this view of the matter and bearing in mind the subsequent events which have transpired after the institution of the suit it is of no significance today that the plaintiff had been admitted to the Third Year T.D.C Class in the Maharani's College in contravention of Order 86A(1)(i) and for that reason neither her second Year T.D.C Examination can he cancelled nor her Third Year T.D.C Examination can be cancelled.

14. The result of the fore-going discussion is that even though I do not agree with the interpretation put on Order 86A(1) (i) by the courts below, the relief granted to the plaintff-respordent by them cannot be set aside. Consequently, I dismiss the appeal without any order as to costs. Learned Counsel for both the parties further agree that even though the courts below have awarded costs to the plaintiff, they will bear their own costs throughout.


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