Delhi High Court
Iqra Parveen vs Satyawati College And Anr on 18 July, 2022
$~67
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Decision: 18th July, 2022
+ W.P.(C) 3409/2021
IQRA PARVEEN ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Arpit Bhargava, Advocate.
versus
SATYAWATI COLLEG E AND ANR ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Ankur Chhibber and Mr. Nikunj Arora,
Advocates for R-2.
Mr. Jitender Verma, Advocate for R-1.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA
JUDGMENT
SANJEEV NARULA, J. (Oral):
CM APPL. 31306/2022 (for interim directions)
1. By way of this application, interim directions are sought for declaration
of results of the Petitioner as per order of this Court dated 4 th April, 2022.
During the course of submissions, counsel for the parties agreed that instead
of the present application, the main petition itself be heard and decided.
Accordingly, with the consent of both counsel, the court proceeded to hear the
main petition, today itself.
W.P.(C) 3409/2021
2. Before adverting to the question that arises for consideration, a brief
narration of facts would be apposite. Petitioner enrolled for the three-year
Signature Not Verified
By:SAPNA SETHI
Signing Date:19.07.2022
19:24:02
B.A. (H) Urdu course (morning shift) [hereinafter the 'course'] in Respondent
No.1 - Satyawati College [hereinafter the 'College'], which has two
semesters each year, totalling to six semesters.
3. In November/December, 2018, she appeared for her first semester
examinations, wherein, as per the results declared by Respondent No. 2 -
University of Delhi [hereinafter the 'University'], she cleared three out of four
subjects and failed in one. Thereafter, she neither filled up the form, nor
appeared in the second semester examinations held in May/June 2019. It is
contended that she was unable to take her second semester examination as she
was pregnant.
4. She attended classes for the third, fourth and fifth semester and
appeared for the examination for the same, yet her results for third and fifth
semesters were not declared. As regards the fourth semester, at that point of
time, due to the pandemic, the University was promoting students on the basis
of internal assignments submitted by them, and thus, she was duly promoted.
5. In this background, the Petitioner approached this Court as a sixth
semester student, praying that her name be restored to the attendance list of
sixth semester; she be allowed to submit internal assignments; be allowed to
sit for the final sixth semester examinations as well as second semester
examinations; and that her marksheets for the third and fifth semester be
released. She is also aggrieved by the marksheet issued by the University at
the end of 1st year of her course on 17th December, 2020, wherein she was
declared to have failed the paper "English - A" in first semester, which, she
Signature Not Verified
By:SAPNA SETHI
Signing Date:19.07.2022
19:24:02
contends, she had retaken along with her third semester examination, the
result of which has also been withheld.
6. Both the University as well as the College filed their counter affidavits
and strongly opposed the relief sought.
7. In the counter affidavit of Respondent No. 2, it has been contended that
the Petitioner has rightly been declared to have failed as per the applicable
rules. The Petitioner was not eligible to be admitted in the third semester and
has to be readmitted to the first year of the course. Reliance is placed upon
Notification No. Acad.- I/Semester/2011/368 dated 03rd January 2012 read
with Notification No. Acad-I/Semester/2011 dated 07th September 2011. The
relevant extract of Notification No. Acad.-I/Semester/2011/368, dated 03rd
January 2012 is reproduced as follows:
"(...) it is further clarified that the students who are detained from appearing in any
semester examination of any Under-graduate/ Post-graduate course, due to shortage
of attendance or for any other reason, will not be eligible for promotion to the next
semester and will have to be re-admitted in the next academic session to the same
semester of the course in which they were detained."
8. Mr. Ankur Chhibber, counsel for Respondent No. 2, argues that since
the Petitioner did not appear in the second semester examination in May/ June,
2019, she was ineligible to be admitted directly to the third semester. He
further contends that as per the ordinance of the University, a student is
eligible for promotion from the first year to the second year only if he/she has
passed at least fifty percent of the papers of the first year. Since the Petitioner
has failed to do so, she is ineligible to be promoted to the second year. In this
regard, attention is invited to a notification dated 20 th December 2020,
Signature Not Verified
By:SAPNA SETHI
Signing Date:19.07.2022
19:24:02
wherein, under the head "Promotion Rules", it is provided that:
"A student shall be eligible for promotion from 1st year to 2nd year/III semester
provided that he/she has passed 50% papers of I and II semester taken together and
similarly for promotion from 2nd year to 3rd year/V semester."
9. Mr. Chhibber emphasises that the Petitioner had no legal right
whatsoever to appear in the third semester examination, and she engineered
admission to appear in same in connivance with an employee of the College.
Therefore, no right can vest in her favour on that basis. No relief should be
granted to the Petitioner who has indulged in unlawful means to appear in an
examination. Granting any relief to the Petitioner would set a bad precedent
and encourage other students to flout the norms. Mr. Chhibber additionally
adds that the Petitioner also cannot take advantage of having cleared the fourth
semester examination as the same was on account of the lockdown conditions
due to COVID-19 whereby the University had allowed the students to be
promoted on the basis of the assignments submitted by them.
10. Mr. Jitender Verma, counsel for the Respondent No. 1 adopts the
submissions advanced by Mr. Chhibber and additionally submits that indeed
the Petitioner is not entitled to any such relief as prayed for. He places reliance
on the counter affidavit wherein it has been specifically averred as under:
"3. (...) During this period the petitioner with the help of an employee filled her form
for the examination and as the examination and annual fee are to be submitted
through online mode; therefore, the petitioner taking advantage of this mode
deposited her fee and the same was not pointed out even to the dealing employee and
because of this the petitioner succeed in getting the examination ticket despite being
ineligible for the same. The relevant excerpts of the ordinance IX clause 12
governing the passing and promotion rules for all the under-Graduate courses under
choice based credit system in University of Delhi is annexed herewith and marked
as Annexure R-1."
11. To buttress the submissions advanced by Mr. Chhibber, Mr. Verma has
Signature Not Verified
By:SAPNA SETHI
Signing Date:19.07.2022
19:24:02
submitted that the Petitioner has managed to appear in the third semester
examination by colluding with an employee of the college which resulted in
issuance of an admit card. He submits that the College, realising this, has even
charge-sheeted the said employee, and an enquiry is underway. Along with
the counter affidavit, a copy of a reply submitted by the said employee is also
annexed. Additionally, reliance is also placed on an office order dated 15th
July, 2021, whereby an Enquiry Committee has been set up by the College.
ANALYSIS
12. The Court has considered the above submissions. Before giving an
opinion on the contentions advanced, it would also be appropriate to take note
of the interim order passed herein on 27th April, 2021, where the Court
directed as under:
"8. For the reasons aforesaid, it is directed that the petitioner be permitted to take
the sixth semester examinations for the B.A. (Hons.) Urdu course, if they are held
prior to the next date of hearing, subject to the result of the writ petition. The result
of the said examinations will not be declared and will be kept by the University's
authorities in a sealed cover. It is made clear that this will be without prejudice to
the rights and contentions of the parties, and the petitioner will not be entitled to
claim any special equities as a result thereof."
13. Thereafter on 28th September, 2021, the Court passed the following
order:
"The proceedings in the matter have been conducted through video conferencing.
1. The stand taken by the respondents is that the petitioner was permitted to take
third, fourth and fifth semester examinations despite being ineligible to do so, due to
the wrongful action of a single employee of respondent no. 1- Satyawati College
["the College"]. It is, prima facie, difficult to appreciate that one employee could
subvert the system in this manner on three occasions i.e. third, fourth and fifth
semester examinations of the petitioner. Despite a specific direction in the order
dated 27.04.2021, the affidavit filed by the respondent no.2- University of Delhi
["the University"] does not explain this position at all. The University's affidavit
only dilates upon the rule position without any advertence to the fact that the
petitioner was permitted to take three sets of examinations while not being entitled
Signature Not Verified
By:SAPNA SETHI
Signing Date:19.07.2022
19:24:02
to do so.
xx ... xx ... xx
4. Mr. Arpit Bhargava, learned counsel for the petitioner, requests that the
petitioner's result be declared in the meantime. However, it is evident from the order
dated 27.04.2021 that the petitioner was permitted to take the sixth semester
examinations without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties, and
without any specific equities being created in her favour. The affidavit filed by the
College raises grave allegations against her with regard to the manner in which she
was able to take the third, fourth and fifth semester examinations, in collusion with
an employee of a college against whom disciplinary proceedings have also been
commenced. These have yet to be examined. Any directions to release the petitioner's
result at this stage will virtually tantamount to allowing the writ petition. I do not
find the said request of Mr. Bhargava to be reasonable as an interim measure, and
the same is therefore rejected."
14. On 4th April, 2022, the Court passed the following order:
"4. In my considered view, even though respondent no.2 may be justified in taking
this stand, the fact remains that the petitioner was permitted to appear in the
examination, and has cleared the examinations conducted by respondent
no.1/college. It, therefore, prima facie appears to be unjust to now require the
petitioner to repeat all the 6 semester in one go. It has been put to learned counsel
for the respondent no.2 to obtain instructions as to whether, in the peculiar facts of
the present petition coupled with the fact that for the last two years, the academic
career of students have been seriously impacted on account of the Covid-19
pandemic, the result for the examinations taken by the petitioner, which are presently
kept in a sealed cover, can be declared."
15. The controversy surrounds the Petitioner taking her third semester
examination, despite being ineligible. In terms of the rules and the ordinance
cited by Mr. Chhibber, there cannot be any dispute that Petitioner had not
cleared the requisite number of examinations required to be promoted to the
next year. Nevertheless, it emerges from the facts recounted above that the
Petitioner had indeed appeared in the third semester examination. According
to the Petitioner, she attended the classes for the third semester and was finally
issued the admit card in November, 2019. Whether this card was issued on an
act of connivance between the Petitioner and the employee named by the
College, is a highly disputed fact. Although an enquiry is ongoing against the
Signature Not Verified
By:SAPNA SETHI
Signing Date:19.07.2022
19:24:02
employee, the same cannot be the basis for the Court to arrive at a conclusion
that there was any connivance on the part of the Petitioner. Although her
appearing in third semester examinations could also be the outcome of sheer
negligence of the employee. The approval of the application by the College
as well as the University, which led to the issuance of her admit card which
allowed her to sit in the examination, cannot be pinned down to one employee
alone on a sheer allegation of connivance.
16. It must also be noted that after appearing in the third semester
examination, Petitioner was further permitted to attend classes for the fourth
semester and the results thereof have also been declared. While there is an
explanation offered for the same by the University (as noted above), which
could be plausible; yet, the undisputed fact remains that Petitioner's result for
the fourth semester has been declared. Thereafter, she was permitted to attend
the fifth semester classes and also appear for its examination. In such
circumstances, as of today, Petitioner has appeared for the third, fourth and
fifth semester examinations. Later, by virtue of an order passed by this Court
dated 27th April 2021, she also appeared for the sixth semester and second
semester backlog/ compartment examinations conducted this year. In fact,
counsel for the Petitioner has informed this Court that while appearing for the
fifth semester examinations, Petitioner had also appeared for the first semester
backlog/ compartment of the examination. In such circumstances, when the
candidate has appeared for all six semesters, the Court cannot simply, on the
basis of a bald allegation of connivance on behalf of the College, ignore the
fact that the Respondents have all throughout permitted Petitioner to attend
classes and appear in the examinations. When she was allowed to appear in
Signature Not Verified
By:SAPNA SETHI
Signing Date:19.07.2022
19:24:02
the third, fourth and fifth semester examinations, without any protest,
Petitioner has a good ground to contend that she reasonably expects that
Respondents had promoted her. This expectation is only natural and
reasonable as she was permitted to continue with her education and appear in
the examination. She therefore, relied upon this representation and any
rejection of her legitimate expectations would work to her detriment. The
University was duty bound to act fairly by taking into consideration all
relevant factors relating to Petitioner's legitimate expectations. At this stage,
when she has completed her course, relegating her to the first year would be
a travesty of justice.
17. In light of the above, the Court is inclined to allow the present petition.
18. Mr. Bhargava states that there is an urgency since Petitioner may have
to appear in certain compartment examinations, depending on the result. The
attention of the Court has been drawn to the notification dated 11 th July, 2022,
by way of which, the University has notified all concerned regular students of
semester two of all Undergraduate (UG) programmes for the academic
session 2021-22 to fill in their examination forms for the examination to be
held in August, 2022 by 25th July, 2022 (11:55 PM), and the Petitioner seeks
to fill the same by the said date, if the need so arises.
19. In light of the above, it is directed that the University will declare
Petitioner's results for all semesters, wherever she has appeared, and provide
her with the marksheets, on or before 24th July, 2022.
Signature Not Verified
By:SAPNA SETHI
Signing Date:19.07.2022
19:24:02
20. The Petition is allowed in the above terms and the pending application
[CM APPL. 31306/2022] is also disposed of.
21. The date already fixed i.e. 8th September, 2022 stands cancelled.
SANJEEV NARULA, J
JULY 18, 2022
nk
Signature Not Verified
By:SAPNA SETHI
Signing Date:19.07.2022
19:24:02
