Delhi High Court
Vipin vs University Of Delhi And Ors on 26 February, 2021
$~6
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Decision: 26th February, 2021
+ W.P.(C) 3049/2020 & CM APPLs. 10616, 29168/2020
VIPIN ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Abir Phukan, Mr. Surya
Prakash and Mr. Ashkrit
Tiwari, Advocates.
versus
UNIVERSITY OF DELHI AND ORS ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Mohinder JS Rupal,
Advocate.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN
PRATEEK JALAN, J. (ORAL)
%
The proceedings in the matter have been conducted through
video conferencing.
1. The petitioner is pursuing an LL.M. course from University of
Delhi ["the University"]. He has filed this writ petition seeking
permission to appear in the Intellectual and Industrial Property Laws -
I (LM-1018) paper in December 2020.
2. At the outset, it is recorded that learned counsel for the parties
have no objection to the petition being heard by this bench, although I
was a member of the Division Bench which heard the petitioner's
appeal against an interim order passed in this petition.
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signing Date:27.02.2021
19:15:29
3. The petitioner enrolled for the LL.M. course in 2014. The
duration of the course was three years (6 terms). Under the
University's rules and regulations, all the papers for the LL.M. course
had to be cleared within six years (known as the "span period"). The
petitioner was thus required to clear all the examinations by
December, 2019.
4. The petitioner has passed all the examinations within the said
period, except for one paper from the first term, viz. Intellectual and
Industrial Property Laws - I (LM-1018). He was unable to appear in
this paper in the regular examination of December, 2014 or
subsequently in December, 2015. He did appear in the said paper in
December 2016, December 2017 and December 2018, but was
unsuccessful in the said paper.
5. The petitioner, therefore, applied to take the paper in the last
attempt available to him in December, 2019. For this purpose, a date-
sheet for the LL.M. Examination dated 31.10.2019 was issued by the
University, in which the date of the Intellectual and Industrial Property
Law - I Examination was declared as 28.12.2019. A perusal of this
date-sheet (which has been filed by the University with its counter-
affidavit as Annexure R-1) shows that it was entitled "Revised &
Final Date-sheet for LL.M/ LL.M (Comparative Laws) 2/3 Year
Courses".
6. However, by a further notification dated 27.11.2019, the
University declared another "Revised & Final Date-sheet for LL.M/
LL.M (Comparative Laws) 2/3 Year Courses". In this revised date-
sheet, the date of the Intellectual and Industrial Property Law - I Paper
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signing Date:27.02.2021
19:15:29
was advanced to 16.12.2019. It is undisputed that the revised date-
sheet was not communicated to the candidates by any personal means
of communication but only uploaded on the website of the University.
7. In these circumstances, the petitioner did not appear for the
examination in December, 2019. As far as the examination of
December, 2020 is concerned, the petitioner was not eligible to appear
for the same in view of the fact that the maximum span period of six
years from the date of his admission had lapsed.
8. The petitioner approached this Court by way of the present writ
petition seeking a further opportunity to sit for the examination in the
aforesaid circumstances. He also sought interim relief in the writ
petition, which was originally declined, by orders dated 12.11.2020
and 26.11.2020.
9. Against the aforesaid orders, the petitioner approached the
Division Bench in LPA No. 372/2020, which was disposed of by a
judgment dated 09.12.2020 (to which I was a party). The Division
Bench observed as follows:-
"3. It appears that the examination of the aforesaid paper
was initially fixed on 28th December, 2019 and the
appellant was to appear in the said examination, being
his last remaining attempt to complete the said course. It
appears from the facts of the case that respondent
University pre-poned the date of the examination to 16th
December, 2019. However, the intimation about the said
pre-ponement was not given to the appellant either by e-
mail, SMS or through any other mode. This is the
bottleneck in the whole matter as, because of the pre-
ponement of the date of examination of the aforesaid
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signing Date:27.02.2021
19:15:29
paper (Intellectual and Industrial Property Law-I), the
appellant could not take the said examination, which
would have been his last attempt to complete the L.L.M.
Course. This last attempt was missed by the appellant
because of the pre-ponement of the date of examination
by the respondent University for which neither any e-
mail, nor any SMS, nor any personal communication,
was sent to him.
4. We, therefore, allow this appellant to appear in the
examination of the paper, Intellectual and Industrial
Property Law-I, which is now scheduled to be held by the
respondent University on 23rd December, 2020. However,
this permission to appear in the said examination would
be subject to the outcome of W.P.(C) 3059/2020 pending
before the learned Single Judge and without prejudice to
the rights and contentions of the parties."
10. The petitioner has since taken the examination pursuant to the
order of the Division Bench and the result is awaited.
11. Having heard Mr. Abir Phukan, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Mr. Mohinder J. S. Rupal, learned counsel for the
University, I am of the view that the petitioner is entitled to the relief
sought in this petition. The only reason which prevented the petitioner
from availing of his last opportunity to take the examination was the
University's action in advancing the date of the examination, that too
without any personal communication to the candidates who had
registered to appear in the examination. It is, in these circumstances,
unreasonable to deny a candidate the opportunity to complete his
degree and obtain the qualification, only on the basis that the span
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signing Date:27.02.2021
19:15:29
period has lapsed. As stated above, the consequence of a strict
enforcement of the span period against the petitioner would be that he
loses the opportunity to complete the LL.M. course for want of having
cleared one paper.
12. Mr. Rupal submits that the imposition of a span period during
which a candidate must clear all the papers in a particular course, has
been upheld by this Court. He states that Special Leave Petitions
against the judgments of this Court have also been dismissed.
However, I do not consider it necessary to enter into this question in
the facts of this case. Mr. Rupal accepts that the judgments do not deal
with the peculiar situation faced in this case, where the candidate
sought to undertake his last attempt during the span period, but was
unable to do so due to the advancement of the examination by the
University. In this situation, it would be unduly harsh to deprive the
student of an opportunity to complete the degree.
13. The University's counter-affidavit also raises the contention that
the petitioner ought to have checked the University's website for any
updates. I do not consider it appropriate to put the onus entirely upon
the petitioner to keep track of any revised date-sheet that may be
published by the University on its website. Further, as mentioned
hereinabove, the date-sheet upon which the petitioner relied was also
described by the University as a "revised and final" date-sheet,
leaving no occasion whatsoever to place such a burden upon the
petitioner.
14. In the facts and circumstances of the present case, therefore, the
petitioner has been able to justify the relief sought. At Mr. Rupal's
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signing Date:27.02.2021
19:15:29
request, it is made clear that this judgment does not foreclose the issue
as to whether the same reasoning would be applicable to a different
factual situation.
15. Since the petitioner has already appeared in the examination in
December 2020, pursuant to the judgment of the Division Bench dated
09.12.2020, his entitlement to the degree will depend upon the result
thereof.
16. For the reasons aforesaid, the petition is allowed. The pending
applications also stand disposed of. There will be no order as to costs.
PRATEEK JALAN, J
FEBRUARY 26, 2021
„vp‟
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed
Signing Date:27.02.2021
19:15:29
