Allahabad High Court
Gyandeep Sharma And Others vs State Of U.P. And Others on 28 September, 2012
Bench: Amreshwar Pratap Sahi
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?AFR
Court No. - 38
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 50419 of 2012
Petitioner :- Gyandeep Sharma And Others
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Others
Petitioner Counsel :- Ravi Kumar Verma,Anand Vikram Singh
Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.,Neeraj Tiwari
Hon'ble Amreshwar Pratap Sahi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioners.
The petitioners have come up challenging the action of the respondents in proceedings to declare results which according to them is contrary to the norms prescribed under the ordinances framed by the respondent University for the 4/5 year under Graduate Degree Programme. A copy of the Ordinances have been placed on record as Annexure 3 to the writ petition.
The petitioners' contention is that other students who had less than 27 credits have been promoted to the next Class which fact is being pressed into service for the purpose that the petitioners also have less than 27 credits therefore they are entitled to the same benefit. The contention therefore is that the respondent University has discriminated the petitioners.
There is no dispute about the credits obtained by the candidates against whom the petitioners seek to compare their status. They have 25 credits but the petitioners have less than 25.
Sri Neeraj Tiwari with the help of Ordinances applicable in the controversy has invited the attention of the Court to Ordinance No. 14 to contend that the promotion to the next academic year would be available if the candidate has 60% or more credits in theory subjects.
According to the petitioners they do not have the 60% of the calculation as required under Ordinance 14 but they contend that those who have lesser than 60% have been promoted.
Sri Neeraj Tiwari submits that some candidates did receive less than the 60% which was required and he has invited the attention of the Court to the mark-sheet of Akash Sharma where 25 credits have been given to the said candidate.
According to the Evaluation Scheme copy whereof has been filed as Annexure 4, maximum of 21 credits in the theory papers is provided in one semester, and therefore combining the credit of 2 semesters, the same comes to 42 and 60% thereof would be 25.2.
Sri Tiwari submits that applying the principle of rounding off those candidates who had obtained 25 credits have been promoted and no further reduction has been made to lower the credit as per Ordinance No. 14. He therefore contends that the petitioners have admittedly less than 25 credits therefore they are not entitled to the said benefit.
Having perused the said Ordinance and having considered the aforesaid submissions, the eligibility for promotion clearly provides for 60% or more credit in theory subjects as demonstrated by Sri Tiwari. The said calculation comes to 25.2. The respondent University in its wisdom has rounded off 25.2 to 25 which does not cause any prejudice either to the merit of the students or even otherwise is not arbitrary. In the absence of any arbitrariness reflected in the said procedure adopted, the claim of the petitioner to further lower down the same, cannot be accepted as this Court is no expert in academic matters for the said consideration of lowering of merit as claimed by the petitioners. They having secured less than 60% as provided for in Ordinance No. 14, no relief can be granted.
Accordingly, there is no merit in the petition, it is hereby dismissed.
Order Date :- 28.9.2012
Sahu
