Suvarna Prakash Jaiswal vs State Of Chhattisgarh
2021 Latest Caselaw 3178 Chatt

                                         1

                                                                             AFR
                 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
                            W.P.(C) No. 3682 of 2021
                         Order Reserved on 21.10.2021
                         Order Delivered on 16.11.2021

        Suvarna Prakash Jaiswal D/o Vinay Prakash Jaiswal Aged About 20 Years
        R/o Flat No. 411, 4th Floor Benikunj Apartment Raigarh Chhattisgarh.,
        District : Raigarh, Chhattisgarh.
                                                                   ---- Petitioner
                                     Versus
     1. State Of Chhattisgarh through The Secretary Department Of Higher
        Education, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Raipur Chhattisgarh,
        District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh.
     2. Pt. Ravishankar Shukla University Through Its Registrar, R/o Great Eastern
        Rd, Amanaka, Raipur Chhattisgarh 492010
     3. Kd Runta College Of Science And Technology Atari, Raipur , Through Its
        Director Address Kdrcst Building, Ward No. 01, Behind Nandan Van, Veer
        Savarkar Nagar, Atari , Raipur Chhattisgarh 492009
     4. The Principal Kd Rungta College Of Science And Technology , Atari Raipur
        Address Kdrcst Building , Ward No. 01, Behind Nandan Van, Veer Savarkar
        Nagar , Atari, Raipur Chhattisgarh 492009
                                                              ---- Respondents

For the Petitioner : Shri Sanjay Agrawal, Advocate.

For Respondent No.1                  :   Shri Ravi Kumar Bhagat, G.A.
For Respondent No.2                  :   Shri Neeraj Choubey, Advocate.
For Respondents No.3 & 4             :   Shri Sourabh Dangi, Advocate.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant CAV ORDER

Heard.

1. This petition has been brought under Article 226 of the Constitution of

India for issuance of appropriate writs against the respondents.

2. It is submitted by counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is a

student of Bachelor of Computer Application in the college of respondent

No.3 - KD Rungta College of Science & Technology. The petitioner could

not appear in the practical exams held in July, 2021 because she was

suffering from fever, cold, cough & throat infection resembling the symptoms

of COVID-19 and she was advised by the doctor to go in quarantine for 10

days. Because of non-appearance of the petitioner, she was declared as

failed in the practical examination of 1st year Computer Application. As the

petitioner was suffering from symptoms which were suspected of COVID-19,

she must have been given relaxation and the practical exams of the

petitioner should have been held separately. Hence, it is prayed that

respondents No.2, 3 & 4 be directed to arrange for taking practical exams of

the petitioner separately, so that her academic year is not spoiled.

Reliance has been placed on the judgment of Kerala High Court in the

case of Azna Beevi and Anr. vs. State of Kerala and Ors. in W.P.(C)

No.15415 of 2021.

3. Learned State counsel makes a formal objection.

4. Learned counsel for respondents No.2 & 3 oppose the submissions

made and submit that although there was suspicion that the petitioner may

be infected with COVID-19 but the fact that she was not infected with corona

virus, therefore, the petitioner is not entitled for grant of any relief.

5. Considered on the submissions. Apart from the submissions, the

petitioner has not placed any reliance of such rules of the University or any

policy adopted by the respondents in the matter of dealing the situation as

presented by the petitioner in this present case. It may be so, that the

petitioner was advised for home quarantine but there is no such report that

either she was infected by corona virus or the period during which the

practical exams were held there was any lock-down operating. Hence, non-

appearance of the petitioner in the practical exams cannot be held directly

attributed to the COVID-19 pandemic conditions.

6. It is unfortunate that the petitioner could not appear in the practical

exams because of her illness but unless there is a clear policy adopted by

the respondents to give relief or relaxation in such cases, the High Court

cannot make any such policy for making it applicable on the University or on

the Institution. Therefore, there appears to be no reason to grant any relief

to the petitioner. Hence, no relief as prayed can be granted in this petition,

however, this Court feels necessity that some direction should be issued.

7. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of. Respondents No. 2 & 3 are

specifically directed to consider on the situation which has been presented

by the petitioner as her case in this petition. There may be a number of

students who failed to give appearance in their exam papers or in their

practical exams on account of similar reasons. Although, the authorities

have relaxed the stringent conditions which were imposed for the purpose of

control of corona virus pandemic, but till date there is no such

announcement made that the corona pandemic is over. Therefore, in the

continuation of such situation, persons or students who are relevant for this

case, who may fall ill, may be advised by the physicians to go for home

quarantine. Such person being bound by the advise given by the physician

and also for the reason that every citizen has a duty to follow the COVID

guidelines is bound to follow and comply with the advise given by such

physicians. Therefore, respondents No.2 & 3 are specifically directed to

consider on this situation and if necessary and practicable, frame a policy

which may be helpful to such students who were either affected by corona

infection or were bound to follow the corona protocols for the other relevant

reasons and consider on giving relief to such students who could not appear

in the examination either due to corona infection or due to the reason that

they were advised by the Doctor to remain in home quarantine. This

direction may be complied at the earliest.

8. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the petition is disposed

off.

Sd/-

(Rajendra Chandra Singh Samant) Judge Nimmi