Nidhi Gupta vs University Of Delhi
2004 Latest Caselaw 247 Del

JUDGMENT

Sanjay Kishan Kaul, J.

1. The petitioner was admitted to the B.Sc. (General) course in respondent No. 4 college affiliated to respondent No. 1 University of Delhi in the year 1999. The petitioner took the first year examination in April 2000 but failed in the examination. The petitioner sought admission in B.A. (Pass) and was given admission in August 2000 to the second year B.A. (Pass) course on the condition that she would be required to take the examination for both first and the second years in April 2001. The petitioner took examination in April 2001 and passed the examination for both the years. The petitioner was admitted to the third year of the course in September 2001 and after receipt of tuition fee the identity card was also renewed. The petitioner appeared for the third year examination in April 2003 after obtaining the admit card for the same. The result of the petitioner was, however, not declared and was withheld by college without assigning any reason.

The petitioner made a representation on 15.11.2002 to the Deputy Controller of Examination followed by certain reminders but to no avail. It is only on 13.1.2003 that the Principal of respondent No. 4 wrote letter to father of the petitioner intimating that the petitioner's admission to the second year course had been declared null and void, thus the result for the final year could not be declared. The petitioner made representation against the same but without success and thereafter filed the present petition.

2. An affidavit has been filed only by respondent No. 4 College stating that the petitioner was permitted to take examination in view of the Ordinance III 2-B which is as under:

"Any student of B.Sc. (Hons) course, who has failed at the Part I examination, but has secured at least 25% marks in the aggregate (Main Subject and qualifying and Subsidiary Subjects taken together) may, at his option be allowed to proceed to second year class of the B.A. (Pass) or B.Com (Pass) or B.Sc. (General) course at the beginning of the first term of the second year of the course, if otherwise eligible for admission to the first year of the B.A. (Pass), B.Com (Pass)/B.Sc. (General) course, as per qualifications possessed by him at that time. Such a student on transfer shall be required to take Part I and Part II examinations simultaneously, of the B.A. (Pass) or B.Com (Pass) or the B.Sc. (General) course, as the case may be, at the end of the second year of the course, if otherwise eligible."

3. It is thus stated that the facility of transfer to students who fail in Part-I examination is given only to the students of B.Sc. (Hons) course and not to B.Sc. (General) course. Since petitioner was student of B.Sc. (General) course, she was not eligible to be admitted to the second year and this mistake was detected only during the annual examination in question. The matter was even referred to Standing Committee (Students) of the Delhi University for resolution of the matter but to no avail.

4. The aforesaid facts and circumstances, show that strictly speaking in accordance with the Ordinance the petitioner ought not to have been granted admission to the second year of the course. The fact remains that for no fault of the petitioner, the petitioner is now sought to be penalised since the petitioner on account of the admission granted was admitted to second year course and even passed the course for both the years. Not only this the petitioner even appeared for the third year examination course. In case the petitioner was not so eligible then the college should not have permitted the petitioner to be admitted. Not only this the University also gave the admit card to the petitioner. Thus the University obviously had knowledge about the fact that the petitioner had not cleared the first year examination and appeared for both first and second years together and cleared the examination. Now to cancel the result of the petitioner would amount to puting the petitioner back to first year course while in fact the petitioner has carried on in the course for three years, cleared first and second year and even appeared for the third year examination. The result of the petitioner had been directed to be produced in a sealed cover which shows that the petitioner has even passed the third year and is, thus, entitled to the degree.

5. In view of the aforesaid, I am of the considered view that the said result of the petitioner is liable to be declared and the petitioner be held to have completed B.A. (Pass) course and passed the same. The needful be done within a period of one month from today.

6. It is made clear that this order is being passed in view of the given facts and circumstances of the case.

7. The writ petition is allowed in the aforesaid terms leaving the parties to bear their own costs.