Tanish Jitendra Kochhar vs Union Of India & Another

[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Uttarakhand High Court

Tanish Jitendra Kochhar vs Union Of India & Another on 17 March, 2026

Author: Pankaj Purohit

Bench: Pankaj Purohit

             Office Notes, reports, orders or
SL.          proceedings or directions and
      Date                                                                     COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No                Registrar's order with
                       Signatures




                                                WPMS No.2372 of 2025
                                                Tanish Jitendra Kochhar                                          ......Petitioner

                                                                       Versus

                                                Union of India & another

                                                                                                            .....Respondents
                                                Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J.

Mr. Devang Dobhal, Ms. Swati Verma and Mr. Kirti Sharan Agarwal, learned counsel for the petitioner.

2. Mr. Rajesh Sharma, learned CGSC for the Union of the India.

3. Mr. Digvijay Nath Dubey, learned counsel (appeared through V.C.) with Mr. Jagdish Singh Bisht, learned counsel for respondent no.2-IIM Kashipur.

4. Rejoinder affidavit is taken on record. Misc. application (IA No.3/2026) stands allowed.

5. During the course of hearing, it transpires that the petitioner was admitted in a two-year MBA (Analytics) course with the respondent no. 2. In all, the petitioner has to clear six terms. The petitioner is a specially abled (disabled) person who took admission under that quota in this MBA (Analytics) course. After appearing in all three terms, the CGPA 4.62 was given to the petitioner and the petitioner got Deficit Credit Points (DCPs) of 17. In order to get promotion to the second year fourth term, the petitioner's DCP should be less than 15. Since his DCP was 17, he was stopped from appearing in the fourth term. The petitioner approached this Court on his not being promoted to the second year fourth term.

6. By the strength of an interim order passed by a Co-

ordinate Bench of this Court, the petitioner was provisionally promoted to the second year fourth term. The said order was challenged by respondent no. 2, IIM Kashipur, by filing Special Appeal No. 217 of 2025. The said special appeal was rendered infructuous on a letter issued by respondent no. 2 whereby it was stated that the petitioner was given provisional admission to enroll in and attend term V classes of the second-year MBA (Analytics) Programme, Batch 2024-26.

7. The petitioner is presently pursuing the sixth term of the second year. Now, the controversy is only with regard to the fourth term, which has been skipped by respondent no. 2.

8. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per the Handbook of IIM Kashipur, there is a provision of Course Independent Study (CIS) in which a student can complete the programme of a term under the supervision of a teacher by submitting assignments/ dissertation. The petitioner wants that facility to be given to him so that he can clear his fourth term second year examination through CIS.

9. Learned counsel for respondent no. 2 shall take specific instructions on this point within a week.

10. List on 23.03.2026 immediately after fresh cases.

(Pankaj Purohit, J.) 17.03.2026 AK