Surya Suresh vs Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha ...
2015 Latest Caselaw 9055 Del

$~44
*      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+      W.P.(C) 11249/2015 and CM No.29324/2015 (stay)
       SURYA SURESH                                       ..... Petitioner
                          Through: Mr. Dinesh Chander Yadav and Mr. A.S.
                          Rishi, Advocates

                          versus

       GURU GOVIND SINGH INDRAPRASTHA
       UNIVERSITY & ORS                            ..... Respondents
                      Through: Mr. Vaibhav Kalra, Adv. for R-1
       CORAM:
       HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER
                ORDER

% 04.12.2015

1. Issue notice to the respondents.

2. Mr. Kalra accepts notice on behalf of respondent no.1.

3. The learned counsel for respondent no.1 says that he does not wish to file a counter affidavit as he has obtained necessary instructions from the concerned authority i.e. respondent no.1.

4. Since the relief prayed for concerns respondent no.1, notice is not required to be issued to respondent no.2 and 3.

5. It is the case of the petitioner that she sat for the Common Admission Test conducted by respondent no.1 for B.Ed. course, relevant for the academic session 2015-2017.

5.1 It is the petitioner's case that she qualified the exam and was granted provisional admission. The grant of provisional admission to the petitioner was pivoted on the petitioner filing the result of her graduation course which

WP(C) 11249/2015 page 1 of 2 was to be declared by the School of Open Learning, University of Delhi. 5.2 The petitioner claims that the result was received only on 09.11.2015. 5.3 I may only note that in paragraph 4 of the petition, the date of declaration of the result is given as 09.10.2015 though in paragraph 5 of the petition, the date set out is 09.11.2015. In any case, the delay in depositing the graduation result is not on account of the petitioner. 5.4 Since, the learned counsel for respondent no.1 says that the petitioner is otherwise eligible to sit for the first semester exams, a direction is issued to that effect. The petitioner will be permitted to sit for the first semester examination in respect of the remaining exams, to be held from 05.12.2015.

6. The learned counsel for the petitioner is satisfied with the said direction being issued in the matter. Learned counsel does not wish to press the writ petition any further.

7. The writ petition and the pending application are disposed of, based on the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and respondent no.1, as noticed above.

8. Dasti under the signatures of the Court Master.

.

                                               RAJIV SHAKDHER, J
DECEMBER 04, 2015
yg




WP(C) 11249/2015                                                    page 2 of 2