Punjab-Haryana High Court
Smriti vs Panjab University And Others on 4 January, 2021
CWP No.18084 of 2020(O&M) #1#
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH.
Date of Decision:-04.01.2021
CWP No.18084 of 2020(O&M)
1.
Smriti.
......Petitioner.
Versus
Panjab University & Ors.
......Respondents.
2.
CWP No.20770 of 2020(O&M)
Kavya Goel.
......Petitioner.
Versus
Panjab University & Ors.
......Respondents.
3.
CWP No.20592 of 2020(O&M)
Malayika Verma.
......Petitioner.
Versus
Panjab University, Chandigarh & Ors.
......Respondents.
4.
CWP No.20594 of 2020(O&M)
Divya Arunima.
......Petitioner.
Versus
Panjab University & Ors.
......Respondents.
5.
1 of 28
::: Downloaded on - 07-02-2021 09:29:08 :::
CWP No.18084 of 2020(O&M) #2#
CWP No.20609 of 2020(O&M)
Utkarsh Sharma.
......Petitioner.
Versus
Panjab University, Chandigarh & Ors.
......Respondents.
6.
CWP No.21222 of 2020(O&M)
Aditya Pratap Singh.
......Petitioner.
Versus
The Panjab University & Ors.
......Respondents.
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANT PARKASH
Present:- Mr. S.K. Garg Narwana, Senior Advocate assisted by
Mr. Vishal Garg Narwana, Advocate for Petitioner
(in CWP No.18084 of 2020).
Mr. Puneet Gupta, Advocate for Petitioner
(in CWP No.20770 of 2020).
Mr. Sandeep Moudgil, Advocate for Petitioner
(in CWP No.20592 of 2020).
Er. Sandeep Suri, Advocate for Petitioner
(in CWP No.20594 of 2020).
Petitioner Utkarsh Sharma in Person
(in CWP No.20609 of 2020).
Mr. Pardhuman Garg, Advocate for Petitioner
(in CWP No.21222 of 2020).
Mr. Akshay Kumar Goel, Advocate for
Respondent-Panjab University.
***
JASWANT SINGH, J.
2 of 28
CWP No.18084 of 2020(O&M) #3#
[The aforesaid presence is being recorded through video conferencing since
the proceedings are being conducted in virtual court]
Through this common order, two sets of cases will be decided
as these involve inter-related prayers and issues viz. whether the Panjab
University was correct in publishing notice dated 28.11.2020 whereby
resolution dated 02.09.2020 granting weightage of 4 marks to students who
had "Legal Studies" subject in 10+2 examination for admission to B.A LL.B
(Hons) 05 Years Integrated course has been withdrawn; and whether on the
basis of such decision dated 2.9.2020 taken and/or as weightage given to
aspirants of B.Com LL.B (Hons) 05 Years Integrated course, similar
benefit/weightage should be granted to students having subjects of B.A.
LL.B (Hons.) Integrated 05 Years Law Course(s) or not.
It is a matter of record that Panjab University offers two 05
Years Integrated Courses viz. B.A. LL.B (Hons.) and B.Com LL.B (Hons.)
with 184 seats each at UILS, Chandigarh with additional 120 seats for B.A.
LL.B (Hons.) 05 Year Integrated Course at two regional centres of
University. It is also undisputed that all the writ petitioners are aspirants
for admission to B.A. LL.B (Hons.) 05 Year Integrated Course seeking
weightage of additional marks as is being extended to B.Com LL.B. (Hons.)
05 Years Course.
For sake of convenience, the prayers made and issues raised are
being segregated writ wise and set wise:
1st set of cases
(I) CWP-18084-2020 titled as Smriti Vs. Panjab University and others
(II) CWP-20770-2020 titled as Kavya Goel Vs. Panjab University and
others.
(I) CWP-18084-2020:-
3 of 28
CWP No.18084 of 2020(O&M) #4#
In this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the
resolution dated 02.09.2020 (Annexure P-4) vide which weightage of 04
Marks was granted to the students who had qualified "Legal Studies"
subject in 10+2 Examination as the same weightage was not extended to the
"Economics subject" to the students who had passed 10+2 Examination
with "Economics subject" as is being given to the students seeking
admission in B.Com LL.B. (Hons.) 05 years Integrated Course. She further
prayed that the respondents-University be directed to fill-up the seats of
B.A. LL.B. (Hons.) 05 years Integrated Course by providing weightage of
04 Marks to the "Economics subject" to the petitioner who had passed
10+2 Examination with Economics subject as the same weightage was
given to the students who had passed 10+2 Examination in Commerce with
Economics subject. The petitioner alleged that she is entitled to weightage
of 04 marks for the subject of Economics as being granted to the subject of
Legal Studies. Hence, she alleges discrimination qua students like her
seeking admission to B.A. LL.B (Hons.) 05 Years Integrated Course
(II) CWP-20770-2020:-
In this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the
Provisional Merit List dated 27.11.2020 (Annexure P-14) prepared without
granting weightage of Marks to the subject of "Mathematics" qualified by
the petitioner in 10+2 examination while seeking admission in B.A. LL.B.
(Hons.) 05 years Integrated Course as the same weightage was extended to
the students seeking admission in B.Com LL.B. (Hons.) 05 years Integrated
Course. She further prayed that the respondent-University be directed to
prepare a fresh revised Merit List of B.A. LL.B. (Hons.) 05 years Integrated
Course by providing weightage of Marks to the "Mathematics subject"
4 of 28
CWP No.18084 of 2020(O&M) #5#
qualified in 10+2 Examination.
2nd set of cases
(I) CWP-20592-2020 (Malayika Verma Vs. Panjab University and
others.)
(II) CWP-20594-2020 (Divya Arunima Vs. Panjab University and
others.)
(III) CWP-20609-2020 (Utkarsh Sharma Vs. Panjab University and
others.)
(IV) CWP-21222-2020 (Aditya Partap Singh Vs. Panjab University and
others.)
All the above mentioned writ petitions were filed by the
petitioners when the University withdrew weightage of 04 marks granted to
the "Legal Studies Subject" vide resolution dated 02.09.2020 to the
students seeking admission in B.A. LL.B. (Hons.) 05 years Integrated
Course only.
(I) CWP-20592-2020:-
The petitioner namely Malavika Verma prayed that Brochure of
the University (Annexure P-2) as far as it relates to "Merit Calculation
(Annexure P-3)" for B.A. LL.B. (Hons.)/ B.Com. LL.B. (Hons.) 05 years
Integrated Course allowing weightage of 04 Marks to the "Legal Studies
Subject" passed at +2 Level to B. Com. LL.B. (Hons.) 05 years Integrated
Course only be quashed. She further prayed that Notice dated 28.11.2020
(Annexure P-16) vide which weightage of 04 marks withdrew to the "Legal
Studies Subject" be quashed which was earlier granted vide resolution dated
02.09.2020 (Annexure P-7) to the students seeking admission in B.A. LLB.
(Hons.) 05 years Integrated Course. She further prayed that she be allowed
to participate in the counseling rescheduled for 02.12.2020 for admission in
B.A. LL. B. (Hons.) 05 years Integrated Course as per the Merit List dated
19.10.2020 (Annexure P-10) prepared by granting weightage of 04 Marks
5 of 28
CWP No.18084 of 2020(O&M) #6#
to the Legal Studies subject.
In this matter notice of motion was issued on 01.12.2020 and
conduct of counseling based on revised list fixed for 02.12.2020 was
ordered to be kept in abeyance.
(II) CWP-20594-2020:-
The petitioner namely Divya Arunima prayed for quashing the
Notice dated 27.11.2020 (Annexure P-12) vide which weightage of 04
marks was withdrawn to the "Legal Studies Subject" and Provisional Merit
List dated 27.11.2020 (Annexure P-11) showing her rank at No. 262,
reduced from No. 17 as shown in Tentative Merit List dated 19.10.2020
(Annexure P-8), for admission in B.A. LL.B (Hons.) 05 years Integrated
Course. She further prayed that the University be directed to restore her
rank in the Provisional Merit List at 17. In this matter, notice was issued on
01.12.2020 and interim order in same terms as passed in CWP No. 20592 of
2020 was passed.
(III) CWP-20609-2020:-
The petitioner prayed for quashing the Notice dated 27.11.2020
(Annexure P-1) vide which weightage of 04 marks was withdrawn to the
"Legal Studies Subject" and Provisional Merit List dated 27.11.2020
(Annexure P-7) showing his rank at No. 356 reduced from No. 26 as shown
in Tentative Merit List dated 19.10.2020 (Annexure P-5), for admission in
B.A. LL.B (Hons.) 05 years Integrated Course. He further prayed that the
respondents-University be directed to adopt the criteria of granting
weightage of 04 marks to the "Legal Studies Subject" as per resolution
dated 02.09.2020 (Annexure P-4) and restore the Tentative Merit List dated
19.10.2020.
6 of 28
CWP No.18084 of 2020(O&M) #7#
In this matter notice of motion was issued on 02.12.2020 and it
was ordered that this matter be listed alongwith CWP No. 20592 of 2020.
(IV) CWP-21222-2020:-
The petitioner prayed for quashing the Brochure of the
University (Annexure P-2) giving weightage of 04 marks to the "Legal
Studies Subject" to the Students qualified at +2 Level seeking admissions
in B.Com. LL.B. (Hons.) 05 years Integrated Course but was denied the
same for admission in B.A. LL.B (Hons.) 05 years Integrated Course.
In this matter notice of motion was issued on 10.12.2020 and
interim order in terms of order passed in CWP No. 17665 of 2020 and other
connected matters was ordered.
2. In this set of writ petitions, the petitioners allege that resolution
dated 02.09.2020 was wrongly withdrawn vide notice dated 28.11.2020 and
also assert discrimination on the ground that weightage of 04 marks was
granted to the Commerce subjects which includes "Legal Studies Subject"
to the students seeking admission in B.Com. LL.B. (Hons.) 05 years
Integrated Course but was declined to the students seeking admission in
B.A. LL.B. (Hons.) 05 years Integrated Course.
CRUX OF THE STAND TAKEN BY PETITIONER IN BOTH SET OF
WRIT PETITIONS
Although detailed written submissions have been given by the
writ petitioners, however, on a perusal thereof, we find that following is the
common stand/arguments of the writ petitioners which is required to be
noticed:-
. In case weightage is given to students who had taken
Leghal Studies as a subject in 10+2 for seeking admission in
7 of 28
CWP No.18084 of 2020(O&M) #8#
B.A. LLB (Hons.) Course then similar kind of weightage
should also be given to students who have studied specialized
subjects relating to the courses where they seek admissions.
. Judgment of Aditya Pratap Duggal & Others Vs. Panjab
University and another bearing CWP No.15512 of 2013 relied
upon by the University goes in favour of the petitoners as this
Court has directed University to award 4 marks for the
commerce subject(s) studied at +2 level, to students seeking
admission to B.Com LL.B (Hons.). It is further further argued
that this judgment is per incuriam, as the Court in Aditya Pratap
Duggal's Case (supra) had not considered the fact that 5 year
law course is an integrated one which cannot be splitted and the
same is governed by the Rules of the Bar Council of India,
especially Rule 13 of Legal Education Part-IV, which prohibits
lateral entry by awarding a degree in splitting the integrated
double degree course at any intermediary stage.
. The P.U. Calendar; Brochure; Rules and Regulations;
Hand Book of information 2020-21; or guidelines attached to
brochure do not specially provide for weightage of four marks
for legal studies subject in B.Com LL.B (Hons.) 5 Year Course.
. University is wrongly granting weightage of marks to a
few additional subjects apart from commerce while granting
admission to B.Com LL.B (Hons) course by relying upon
amendment made to PU Calendar Vol-II, as the same has been
carried out on 20.07.2020 i.e. much later to the publication of
Brochure.
. There cannot be discrimination amongst similar set of
courses especially when the eligibility criteria is same for all
the students and all are eligible for both the courses with the
same qualification i.e. 10+2 in any stream.
Stand of University:
3. The common stand taken by the respondent-Punjab University
8 of 28
CWP No.18084 of 2020(O&M) #9#
in all these cases is that no discrimination has been caused by the University
while granting weightage of marks to the Commerce Subjects only to the
students seeking admission in B.Com. LL.B. (Hons.) 05 years Integrated
Course.
4. As per the University, the process for admission to the
B.A.LL.B. (Hons.) 5 years integrated Course and B.Com. LL.B (Hons.) 5
years integrated Course was initiated and effected in accordance with the
provisions of the Prospectus, issued on 01.04.2020 and Online Admission
Schedule issued from time to time due to Covid 19 pandemic outbreak and
applying the decision dated 25.07.2013 in CWP No. 15513 of 2013, titled as
Aditya Pratap Duggal and others Vs. Panjab University and others; as also
CWP No. 15806 of 2013, titled as Pragajit Loomba Vs. Panjab
University whereby this Court had directed the University to award 4 marks
for B.Com LL.B (Hons.) 05 years integrated course in parity with B.Com
course offered by the Univeristy.
5. The University prepared the provisional merit list for B.A.
LL.B. (Hons.) 5 years Integrated Course as per the criteria stated in PARA
23 of the Prospectus i.e., Entrance Test: 50% + Qualifying Examination
(+2): 50% + other admissible weightage and for B.Com. LL.B. (Hons.) 5
years Integrated Course i.e., Entrance Test: 50% + Qualifying Examination
(+2): 50% + with weightage for Commerce subjects and other admissible
weightage. Every candidate was given 50 marks for entrance test (since
entrance test scrapped). The permissible weightage to the commerce
subjects provided in the Calendar of the University as well as the Prospectus
has been allowed. It has been specifically mentioned in PARA 23 of the
Prospectus that "weightage shall be given for the commerce subjects for
9 of 28
CWP No.18084 of 2020(O&M) #10#
admission to B.Com.LL.B (Hons.) as per P.U. Calendar and other rules
and regulations laid down by Competent Authorities/bodies of Panjab
University from time to time". Thus, weightage has been allowed only for
the "Commerce Subjects" to the students seeking admission in B.Com.
LL.B. (Hons.) 5 years Integrated Course.
6. However, for this academic year 2020-21, considering the
COVID 19 pandemic situation, the University scrapped the UGLAW
entrance test and the admission was to be made on the basis of 10+2
examination result. This Court vide decision dated 04.11.2020 in CWP-
16962-2020 titled as Chiraag Malhi Vs. Panjab University and others
upheld the scrapping of the entrance examination with the observation that "
the scrapping of the entrance examination, as it could lead to spread of
virus, therefore appears to be in public interest, which cannot be faulted in
the light of above facts and circumstances and thus, do not call for
interference by this court, especially when the respondent University has
specifically stated that this decision is only for this year because of the
peculiar and unexpected situation arising out of the pandemic".
Consequently, decision to give en-mass 50% weightage on account of non-
holding of written examination as also admission based on simplicitor
qualifying examination have been upheld.
7. Thus, in nutshell, the main thrust of argument raised by
respondent-University is that the admission process is being carried out as
per prospectus issued which has a statutory backing of University calendar
and therefore the claims raised by writ petitioners for equating them with
B.Com LL.B (Hons.) 5 years course cannot be granted.
8. As far as issue regarding denial of weightage of marks to the
10 of 28
CWP No.18084 of 2020(O&M) #11#
Legal Studies Subject qualified at +2 level to the Students seeking
admission in B.A. LL.B.(Hons.) 05 Years Integrated Course is concerned, it
is the stand of University that the Panjab University does not provide any
"weightage to any other subjects of Humanities/Science/Commerce" in
its Calendar when the students seek admission in B.A. /B.Sc. 3 years Degree
Course or in any other Faculty providing graduation in any stream. Equally
the students possessing requisite qualification of +2 level while seeking
admission in B.A. /B.Sc. 3 years Degree Course, or in any other Faculty
providing graduation in any stream are not entitled to claim "weightage in
any particular subjects of Humanities/Science/Commerce" as are being
provided to the students of +2 commerce stream seeking admission in the
regular B.Com Course. Similarly, "No weightage" has been allowed for any
other Humanities/Science/Commerce subjects to the students seeking
admission in B.A. LL.B. (Hons.) 5 years Integrated Course nor any
weightage is provided for the Commerce Subjects to the candidates seeking
admission in B.A. LL.B. (Hons.) 5 years Integrated Course.
9. It is further submitted that the University cannot and is not
empowered under the provisions of the Calendar to change the criteria by
allowing weightage of 4 Marks to the students who studied/qualified the
subject of "Legal Studies/Economics/Mathematics or for any other subjects"
while seeking admission in the B.A. LL.B. (Hons.) 5 years Integrated
Course when no weightage of marks for theses subject or any other subjects
of Humanities/Science/Commerce etc., is provided for other courses i.e.,
B.A. /B.Sc. 3 years Degree Course or in any other Faculty providing
graduation in any stream in Calendar of the University. Had any weightage
of marks for any subject(s) of Humanities/Science/Commerce etc., been
11 of 28
CWP No.18084 of 2020(O&M) #12#
provided in seeking admission in B.A. /B.Sc. 3 years Degree Course, then of
course similar weightage had to be made available to the students seeking
admission in the B.A. LL.B. (Hons.) 5 years Integrated Course. In the
absence of giving any weightage of any marks to any subjects of
Humanities/Science/Commerce etc., while seeking admission in B.A./B.Sc.
3 years Degree Course would not clothe the candidate(s) with weightage of
marks in a particular subject of "Legal Studies/Economics/Mathematics or
for any other subjects" for seeking admission in B.A. LL.B. (Hons.) 5 years
Integrated Course.
10. Hence, again emphasis has been laid by the University on its
Calendar as well as prospectus issued by it for the present academic year to
justify the non-inclusion of weightage to any other course.
11. For the issue regarding the withdrawal of resolution dated
02.09.2020, it is stated by University that although 'The Joint Admission
Committee' had recommended/proposed that weightage of 04 marks shall
be given to the students who had studied Legal Studies Paper in 10+2 while
seeking admission in B.A. LL.B. (Hons) 5 years Integrated course also.
However, it is emphatically denied that the weightage of 04 marks has been
provided vide letter/communication dated 02.09.2020 for the Legal Subject
Paper passed at +2 level to the students for seeking admission both in B.A.
LL.B and B.Com LL.B. (Hons.) 5 years Integrated course vide decision
taken on 20.08.2020 by the Joint Admission Committee. Nonetheless, the
letter dated 02.09.2020 was made available on the website
[email protected] and the tentative list was prepared by giving
weightage of 4 marks to the Legal Studies subject to the candidates seeking
admission in B.A. LL.B. (Hons.) 05 years integrated course also which was
12 of 28
CWP No.18084 of 2020(O&M) #13#
displayed on 19.10.2020.
12. In pursuance thereto, 20.10.2020 and 21.10.2020 were fixed
for inviting objections from the students against the tentative list. Numerous
objections were filed by the students against the tentative list prepared for
B.A. LL.B. (Hons.) 5 years Integrated course. Thereafter, a notice was
displayed on the abovesaid website that the provisional merit list for
admission to the B.A., B.Com LL.B. (Hons.) 05 years integrated course was
to be displayed on 23.10.2020 by evening but the same was postponed till
further orders.
13. Finally the Vice-Chancellor after going through minutes of the
meeting dated 20.08.2020 of the Joint Admission committee and giving due
consideration to the provisions of the Prospectus, the Hand-Book of
Information 2020 and the amended provisions of VOL II of the Calendar,
2007 dealing with the admissions in B.Com. (Semester System) for the
session 2020-2021 did not approve the recommendation dated
20.08.2020 proposed by the Joint Admission Committee. Thereafter,
the UILS withdrew the letter/communication dated 02.09.2020 and
displayed provisional merit list of the candidates seeking admission in
B.A. LL.B. (Hons.) 5 years Integrated course without giving weightage
of 4 marks to the Legal Studies Paper.
14. Here again the University had referred to it Calendar and
Prospectus to say that the decision was not approved by the competent
authority-Vice Chancellor as awarding of such weightage goes against these
statutory documents.
We have heard Ld. Counsel for the parties at length and have
perused the paperbooks.
13 of 28
CWP No.18084 of 2020(O&M) #14#
Issue for consideration
15. It is seen that the facts of the case are not much in dispute.
However, we acknowledge that the dispute centers around only one ISSUE
viz the granting of weightage of four marks towards certain subjects for
admission to B.Com LL.B (Hons) 05 Year Integrated Course and non-
awarding of similar weightage to other/similar subjects while admitting
students to B.A. LL.B (Hons) 05 Year Integrated Course towards
determination of merit by Panjab University.
Discussion
16. Having deliberated upon the controversy involved and
scrutinized the rival submissions, we are of the opinion that the counsel for
the University is correct when he submits that the University is bound by
the Calendar and Prospectus, when concededly neither are the provisions of
the University Calendar or the Prospectus are under challenge, for the
purpose of conducting admissions to various courses. The Calendar of any
University has a statutory backing which cannot be deviated from by the
University. Once, in the said Calendar, the mode of admissions and
weightage to be awarded has been mentioned, which has been admittedly
followed in the prospectus by the University, then even the prospectus is
binding upon the University as well as the students applying under the said
prospectus.
17. A perusal of the record shows that Vol. II, Para 3.1 B of the
University Calendar stipulated that weightage of 4 marks for each of the
Commerce subjects as per PU Calendar Vol.II, Para 3.1A (a) but not
exceeding 16 in total, be provided to the students seeking admission to the
regular B.Com. 3 year Degree Course.
14 of 28
CWP No.18084 of 2020(O&M) #15#
18. On the basis of this very paragraph in the PU Calender some
students preferred writ petitions bearing CWP No. 15513 of 2013, titled as
Aditya Pratap Duggal and others Vs. Panjab University and others and
CWP No. 15806 of 2013, titled as Pragajit Loomba Vs. Panjab
University seeking quashing of the eligibility criteria provided by the
University for admission to B. Com. LL.B. (Hons.) 5 years Integrated
Course as it was contrary to the criteria provided for admission to the
regular B.Com. 3 year Degree course by the University and further claiming
that the seats of the B. Com. LL.B. (Hons.) 5 years Integrated Course may
be filled up by adopting the same eligibility criteria as provided for
admission to the regular B.Com. Degree course i.e. by allowing weightage
of 4 marks for each of the Commerce subjects as provided in PU Calendar
Vol.II, Para 3.1 B but however not exceeding 16 in total. This Court
allowed the writ petitions vide decision dated 25.07.2013 directing the
University that the final merit list for admission to B. Com. LL.B. (Hons.) 5
years Integrated Course be prepared by giving weightage to the students as
was being given to the students seeking admission to the regular B.Com. 3
year Degree Course.
19. It was also observed by this Court that a student of regular
B.Com. Degree Course would get Degree of Commerce after completion of
3 years of study and similarly the student of B. Com. LL.B. (Hons.) 5 years
Integrated Course would also get the Degree of Commerce after completion
of 3 years as had been decided in the meeting of the Senate dated
22.12.2012 and 24.01.2013 in which it was approved that "if a student of 5
year B.A.LL.B. (Hons.) 05 years Integrated Course wishes to discontinue
his/her studies, he/she be awarded the degree of B.A., after successful
15 of 28
CWP No.18084 of 2020(O&M) #16#
completion of the first three years of the course". The decision of the Senate
was contrary to what the Bar Council of India had prohibited "lateral exit"
by bifurcating the two Degrees of B.A. and LL.B. Thus, the University
itself decided to award Degree of B.A. to the students after their completion
of successful 3 years Course in the B.A. L.L.B.(Hons.) 5 years Integrated
Course students. Similarly Degree of B.Com., after completion of
successful 3 years Course in the B.Com. LL.B.(Hons.) 5 years Integrated
Course was to be awarded/allowed.
It is an admitted position that no appeal was filed against the
said judgment and same has attained finality. Once that is so, we are of the
opinion that the said judgment is binding upon the University as it
conclusively decided an issue regarding grant of weightage to a particular
stream of students on the basis of interpretation of the University Calendar
applicable at that point of time. It is true that accurate import and effect of
Rule 13 of Legal Education Part-IV of Bar Council of India Rules
(Prohibiting splitting up of Integrated 05 years degree law courses) has not
been considered by the University while taking a decision for splitting up
the 05 years integrated courses of Law, however, in view of the fact that
petitioners are claiming weightage of marks on the basis of Aditya Pratap
Duggal's judgment in their streams as well and are not challenging the
grant of weightage to B.Com LLB (Hons.) 05 years integrated Course, this
decision is binding on the University till it is revisited in appropriate case.
20. Coming back to our discussion, it is not in dispute that the
University implemented the above mentioned decisions and started giving
weightage in Commerce subjects to the students seeking admission to B.
Com. LL.B. (Hons.) 5 years Integrated Course as being given to the students
16 of 28
CWP No.18084 of 2020(O&M) #17#
seeking admission to the regular B.Com. 3 year Degree Course. We have
been told that there was/is no other statutory right (except based on the
judgment and the consequent amendments in University Calendar) vested
for the students of +2 commerce stream for seeking weightage for
commerce subjects while seeking admission in B. Com. LL.B. (Hons.) 5
years Integrated Course, which in any case is not admissible towards
seeking admission in B.A LL.B 05 years integrated course. Therefore,
before proceeding further, it is necessary to analyse and understand the
methodology for granting of weightage to B.Com 3 Years Course as well.
METHODOLOGY FOR GRANT OF WEIGHTAGE TO B.COM 3
YEAR DEGREE COURSE
21. Further, we find from the record that aforesid Para 3.1A and
Para 3.1 B of Vol. II, Panjab University Calendar were replaced and
renumbered as Para 2(A) and Para 2(B) respectively by the Regulations
whereby Semester System for Bachelor of Commerce was introduced w.e.f.
Session 2014-15.
22. It is also apparent that the Assistant Registrar (General)
conveyed to the Chairperson, University Business School, Panjab
University, Chandigarh vide letter dated 20.07.2020 that the Vice-
Chancellor had approved the recommendation of the Extended
Undergraduate Board of Studies in Commerce dated 03.03.2020 (providing
inter alia inclusion of additional subjects in Commerce for grant of
weightage) in anticipation of the approval of the Syndicate/Senate that
addition in Regulation 2 (A ) for B.Com (Semester System) be made for
calculation of weightage for admission in B.Com Course w.e.f the
academic session 2020-2021, as per appendix. Thus the provisions of
Panjab University calendar, Volume II, 2007 dealing with the admission for
17 of 28
CWP No.18084 of 2020(O&M) #18#
the Bachelor of Commerce (Semester System) stood amended with addition
in Regulation 2(A), (effective from the session 2020-2021). The admission
to the regular B.Com Course for the session 2020-2021 had already been
effected according to the amended provisions of Vol. II, 2007 Calendar
which had been prescribed in the Prospectus for the session 2020-2021 and
the extract is reproduced below:-
" BACHELOR OF COMMERCE (B. Com)
1. 2 (A) Admission to the first semester of B.Com Degree Course shall
be open to a person who has passed one of the following
examinations conducted by a recognized Board / Council /
University:
a) +2 Examination or B.Com Part-I (Old Scheme) of Panjab
University with three of the following subjects securing at
least 45% marks in aggregate;
i) Commerce (or Theory of Commerce or Foundation Course in
Commerce)
ii) Accountancy (or Book Keeping and Accountancy)
iii) Economics
iv) Business Organization (or Business Management or Theory and
Practice of Management)
v) Insurance (or General Insurance or Life Insurance)
vi) Banking and Trade
vii) Commercial Geography
viii) Office Management and Secretarial Practice (or Office
Organization and Management)
ix) Mercantile Law (or any Company Law)
x) Auditing
xi) Typewriting and Stenography/Computers (for typewriting)
ADDITIONAL SUBJECTS:
Accountancy/Accounts/Accounting Cost Accounting
Accounting for Business Derivative Market Operation
Advance and Foreign Exchange Economics Geography
Advanced Maths & Computer Applications Economics
Auditing E-Commerce
Banking Elements of Accounting
Booking Keeping and Accountancy Elements of Cost Accounting and
Auditing
Business Economics & Quantitative Elements of Cost Accounting
Methods
Business Mathematics Entrepreneurship
Business Organization & Management Factory Organization / Office
Administration
Business Studies /Financial Accounting
Business Studies-II Financial Market Management
Capital Market Operations Fundamental of E-Business
Commerce Human Resource Management
Computerized Accounting II Income Tax
Informatics Practices Office Communication
18 of 28
CWP No.18084 of 2020(O&M) #19#
Insurance Office Procedures and Practices
Introduction to Financial Markets Organization of Commerce
Investment Management Principles and Practices of Life
Insurance
Legal Studies Principle of Management &
Economics
Management and Marketing of Insurance Retailing
Management of Resources Retail Management
Marketing Salesmanship
Marketing and Salesmanship Secretarial Practices and Accounting
Marketing Management and Retail Business Shorthand
Materials Management Statistics Store Accounting
Mathematics Type Writing
Mathematics (B) Theory and practice of Commerce
Management of Bank Office Taxation
Modern Office Practice-II
b) +2 Examination with at least two of the subjects mentioned in (a)
securing at least 50% marks in aggregate.
c) +2 Examination who does not cover (a) and (b) securing at least
55% marks.
d) Any other examination recognized by Panjab University as equivalent
to (a) or (b) or (c) as given above with requisite percentage of marks
given under each clause."
Xxx
"B) Subject to the reservation made by the University, the admission shall
be on merit. The merit for this purpose shall be determined on the basis of
the score of a candidate to be computed as follows:
(i) Percentage of marks in the qualifying examination
(ii) Add score of 4 for each of the subjects passed from the
subjects referred to in 3.1 (A) not exceeding 16 in total. "
(emphasis supplied )
The Commerce Subjects shown from (i) to (xi) are the one
which are prescribed in PARA 2(A) (a) of Vol. II of the University Calendar
and the University had introduced "Additional Subjects" in the same
PARA from the session 2020-2021 for which also the students could claim
weightage of 4 marks for each subject which shall not exceed 16 in total as
per PARA 2 (B) while seeking admission in regular B.Com (Semester
System) Course. The List of "Additional Subjects" (the genesis leading to
19 of 28
CWP No.18084 of 2020(O&M) #20#
dispute involved herein) includes the subject of "Legal Studies" for which a
student of +2 of Commerce stream or any other stream studied it in +2 level
was entitled to weightage of 4 marks as per PARA 2 (B) while seeking
admission in regular B.Com. 3 years Degree Course.
WEIGHTAGE GIVEN TO SUBJECTS FOR ADMISSION TO B.COM
THREE YEARS COURSE ALSO GIVEN TO STUDENTS SEEKING
ADMISSION TO B.COM L.L.B (Hons.) 05 YEARS INTEGRATED
COURSE
23. Therefore, the same student who qualified "Legal Studies" in
+2 level of commerce stream or any other stream, and was aspirant to seek
admission in B. Com. LL.B. (Hons.) 5 years Integrated Course was entitled
to seek weightage of 4 marks as was being given to the students seeking
admission in regular B.Com. Course. Hence, a student of +2 Commerce
stream or any other stream studied/qualified the subject of "Legal Studies"
is entitled to weightage of 4 Marks while seeking admission only in regular
B.Com. Course or B. Com. LL.B. (Hons.) 05 years Integrated Course but
not for any other courses i.e., B.A. /B.Sc. 3 years Degree Course or in any
other Faculty providing graduation in any stream or B.A. LL.B. (Hons.) 5
years Integrated Course.
24. A conjoint reading of paragraph 23 of the brochure
(reproduced in paragraph 5 hereinabove of our judgment) and the aforesaid
paragraphs, it is apparent that the eligibility condition for B.Com. LL.B
(Hons.) 5 years integrated course shall be governed by the respective
rules/regulations as enshrined in the P.U. calendar and/or the General
Guidelines for Admissions/ Hand Book of Information issued by the
University and/or decisions of the University Senate/Syndicate/Vice-
Chancellor and in case of any conflict in the Prospectus on one hand and the
university Rules, on the other, the latter shall prevail. Meaning thereby,
20 of 28
CWP No.18084 of 2020(O&M) #21#
that the rules/regulations as enshrined in P.U. Calendar and/or the General
Guidelines for Admissions/Hand Book of Information issued by the
university would have precedence over and above the Prospectus. It is
provided in the University Calendar that weightage had to be given to the
admission in regular B.Com. Course and since this Court in Aditya Pratap
Duggal's case had equated the B.Com. LL.B. (Hons.) 5 years integrated
Course with the regular B.Com Course and therefore, weightage of 4 marks
each for the subjects which shall not exceed 16 in toto as per PARA 2 (B) in
the subjects shown in PARA 2 (A) to the students seeking admission in
regular B.Com. Course for the session 2020-2021 had to be given to the
candidate seeking admission in B.Com. LL.B. (Hons.) 5 years integrated
Course. Since the amendment in the University Calendar had been carried
out prior to initiation of admission process, therefore, the amended calendar
(which has additional subjects) would be applicable to the present
admission process. Hence the arguments raised by the writ petitioners that
there is no provision in the prospectus and amended Vol-II of the University
Calendar cannot be considered, are incorrect in view of the specific clause
23 in the Prospectus ( as reproduced in paragraph 5 hereinabove of the
judgment).
25. Resultantly, the weightage is restricted to the students of +2 of
Commerce stream and the students of +2 Non-Medical, Arts or Medical
stream, having qualified additional subjects of Legal
studies/Mathematics/Economics while seeking admission in the regular
B.Com. Course or B. Com. LL.B. (Hons.) 5 years Integrated Course ONLY
but not to any other Courses i.e., B.A./B.Sc etc., as are available in the
Calendar of Panjab University or B.A. LL.B. (Hons.) 5 years Integrated
21 of 28
CWP No.18084 of 2020(O&M) #22#
Course.
26. The paragraphs of University Calendar as referred in
paragraphs 21 & 22 hereinabove highlight the extent to which University
Calendar has been amended for grant of additional weightage to commerce
courses for admission at graduate level and they have been incorporated in
the admission prospectus.
27. Reference in regard to binding nature of prospectus can be
made to the Full Bench Judgment of this Court in Indu Gupta v. Director
Sports, Punjab and Anr., AIR 1999 P&H 319 (FB). The Full Bench in
paragraphs 9, 10 and 11 has expressed as follows:
" 9. A Full Bench of this Court in the case of Raj Singh v.
Maharshi Dayanand University, (1994) 4 Recent Services
Judgments, 289 disapproved the liberal construction of the terms
and conditions of the brochure and specified the need for their
strict adherence to avoid unnecessary prejudice to the candidate
or the authority during the course of admission. The bench
approved that the eligibility for admission to a course has to be
seen according to the prospectus issued before the entrance test
examination and that the admission has to be made on the basis
of the instructions given in the prospectus having the force of
law. While disapproving the law laid down by a Division Bench of
this Court in the case of Madhvika Khurana (minor) v. M. D.
University Civil Writ Petition No. 15367 of 1991, where contrary
view had been taken, the Full Bench observed that the students
seeking admission to the professional colleges are even otherwise
matured enough and supposed to understand the full implication
of filling the admission form and compliance with the
instructions contained in the brochure.
10. Subsequently, another Full Bench of this Court in the case
of Rahul Prabhakar v. Punjab Technical University, Jalandhar,
1997 (3) RSJ 475: (AIR 1998 Punj. & Har. 18) recapitulated the
entire law on the subject. The Full Bench was considering the
same brochure for the previous year of the Punjab Technical
University. The Court held as under:-
"A Full Bench of this Court in Amardeep Singh Sahota v.
State of Punjab (1993) 4 Serv LR 673 had to consider the
scope and binding force of the provisions contained in the
prospectus. The Bench took the view that the prospectus
issued for admission to a course, has the force of law and
it was not open to alteration. In Raj Singh v. Maharshi
Dayanand University, 1994 (4) R.S.J. 289 another Full
Bench of this Court took the view that a candidate will
have to be taken to be bound by the information supplied
in the admission form and cannot be allowed to take a
stand that suits him at a given time. The Full Bench
approved the view expressed in earlier Full Bench
22 of 28
CWP No.18084 of 2020(O&M) #23#
that eligibility for admission to a course has to be
seen according to the prospectus issued before the
Entrance Examination and that the admission has to
be made on the basis of instructions given in the
prospectus, having the force of law. Again Full Bench
of this Court in Sachin Gaur v. Punjab University, 1996
(1) RSJ 1: (AIR 1996 Punj. & Har. 109) took the view that
there has to be a cut off date provided for admission and
the same cannot be changed afterwards. These views
expressed by earlier Full Benches have been followed in
CWP No. 6756 of 1996 by the three of us constituting
another Full Bench. Thus, it is settled law that the
provisions contained in the information brochure for
the Common Entrance Test 1997 have the force of
law and have to be strictly complied with. No
modification can be made by the court in exercise of
powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
Whenever a notification calling for applications, fixes
date and time within which applications are to be
received whether sent through post or by any other mode
that time schedule has to be complied with in letter and
spirit. If the application has not reached the co-
ordinator or the competent authority as the case may be
the same cannot be considered as having been filed in
terms of the provisions contained in the prospectus or
Information Brochure. Applications filed in violation of
the terms of the brochure have only to be rejected."
11. The cumulative effect of the above well enunciated
principles of law, is that the terms and conditions of the
brochure where they used preemptory language cannot be
held to be merely declaratory. They have to be and must
necessarily to be treated as mandatory. Their compliance
would be essential otherwise the basic principle of fairness
in such highly competitive entrance examinations would
stand frustrated. Vesting of discretion in an individual in
such matters, to waive or dilute the stipulated conditions of
the brochure would per se introduce the element of
discrimination, arbitrariness and unfairness. Such
unrestricted discretion in contravention to the terms of the
brochure would decimate the very intent behind the terms
and conditions of the brochure, more particularly, where the
cut off date itself has been provided in the brochure. The
brochure has the force of law. Submission of applications
complete in all respects is a sine qua non to the valid acceptance
and consideration of an application for allotment of seats in
accordance with the terms prescribed in the brochure.
(emphasis supplied)
28. We have referred to the aforesaid decisions only to highlight
the consistent view taken by Full Benches of our High Court that conditions
stipulated in the prospectus are guidelines for all concerned and everyone is
required to follow the same in letter and spirit and not act in transgression.
23 of 28
CWP No.18084 of 2020(O&M) #24#
The hopes and aspirations of the students, who applied under the said
prospectus cannot be scuttled by changing it by way of introducing a
corrigendum or resolution dated 02.09.2020 which does not find mention in
the prospectus. A change in the conditions of the prospectus can be
conceived of and allowed if such power is specifically reserved while
making the prospectus public as in that case, no one can think of having a
right. In that event, the same could be capable of change. No such power
has been shown to us.
29. In the case at hand, in the absence of a power reserved in the
prospectus as also in the Calendar, in our considered opinion, the terms of
the prospectus could not have been altered by way of resolution dated
02.09.2020. It is interesting to note remarkable changes in the names of
Candidates from a bare perusal of provisioinal merit list dated 19.10.2020
which was prepared on the basis of resolution dated 02.09.2020 and the
subsequent provisional merit list dated 28.11.2020 prepared after
withdrawal of the resolution. The candidates coming within zone of
consideration are absolutely different. Hence, this resolution dated
02.09.2020 having a drastic effect, according to us, was nothing but a
bonafide mistake and therefore it was rightly withdrawn by the University
vide notice dated 28.11.2020, after rejection by the competent authority-
Vice Chancellor.
30. At this stage it is relevant to point out that petitioner namely
Divya Arunima has impleaded in C.M.-13938-CWP-2020 filed in CWP-
20594-2020 that the University provides weightage of 2% marks for the
Subject of Economics while seeking admission in B.A. (Hons.) Economics
and 10% weightages for the Social Sciences for admission in B.A.
24 of 28
CWP No.18084 of 2020(O&M) #25#
(Hons.)Social Sciences.
Qua this, it is seen that two Special Courses i.e., B.A. (Hons.)
Economics and B.A. (Hons.)Social Sciences are available only in the
University Campus. Additional Weightage of 2% marks has been allowed
for the subject of Economics only to the students who had studied
Economics at +2 level while seeking admission for B.A. (Hons.)
Economics. Further, Weightage of 10% for Social Sciences subjects
studied at 10+2 level has been provided if the students sought admission in
B.A. (Hons.) Social Sciences. The same weightage cannot be provided in
B.A. LL.B. (Hons.) 5 years Integrated Course as the nomenclature of the
degree is not B.A. (Hons.) Economics LL.B. (Hons.) 05 years integrated
course or B.A. (Hons.) Social Sciences LL.B. (Hons.) 5 years Integrated
Course. Hence, there is no comparison between the courses as alleged.
31. Although we strongly feel that there is a larger issue involved
regarding the discrimination amongst the similar courses offered by the
University, however, in the absence of challenge to such offending
paragraphs of the Calendar and also considering the sensitivity of the stage
of admissions, when the process of admissions has been delayed by more
than one semester, we have no option but NOT to interfere in these petitions
and address the larger issue of faulty University Calendar.
32. Seen from another angle, any change/ interference in even one
of the course at this stage will per-force adversely affect the remaining
courses as well, for which admission process is already over. Not only this,
the affected candidates are also not before us and therefore they cannot be
condemned unheard. Hence, interference at this stage will only result in
chaos and uncertainty, which we are not inclined to create.
25 of 28
CWP No.18084 of 2020(O&M) #26#
33. Even though it has been pointed out by the Counsel for
petitioners that on account of the provisional list dated 19.10.2020, they had
foregone taking admission in other colleges, however, we find that no
matter how pressing the equity is in favor of petitioners, law must take its
recourse in the present case. The unfortunate situation arising out of the
resolution dated 2.9.2020 duly published by the University without statutory
backing must have caused difficulties to the writ petitioners, however,
except for relegating them to their respective legal remedies, we cannot
come to their rescue and permit and illegality to be committed in the
admission process.
DECISION
34. Thus, we find that the prayers made in these writ petitions are
without any force and liable to be rejected as the University calendar as also
prospectus provides grant of weightage to only one course i.e B.Com LLB
(Hons) 5 year course and not to any other course. Consequently, no other
course can be granted weightage and thus, the issue is accordingly decided
in favour of the University.
RECOMMENDATION TO THE UNIVERSITY
35. Before parting with the judgment, we must add our anguish to
the unfortunate anomalous situation created by the University, whereby for
similar courses published under same prospectus, weightage is being
granted to one stream of students and such weightage is not available to
other streams. This anomaly is amplified now even more, in view of the fact
that students are to be granted admission on the basis of their marks in +2
examination, on account of scrapping of written examination. Once, Rule
13 of Legal Education Part-IV of Bar Council of India Rules barred
26 of 28
CWP No.18084 of 2020(O&M) #27#
splitting up of a 05 years integrated law course into a 03 year degree, there
seems no plausible reasoning for permitting splitting up of B.Com/BA
L.L.B 05 Years Integrated Courses and thereby inviting a judgment from
this Court in Aditya Pratap Duggal's case which has led to present litigation.
For ready referrence, Rule 13 is reproduced as under:-
" 13. Prohibition against later entry and exit
There shall be no lateral entry on the plea of graduation in
any subject or exist by way of awarding a degree splitting the
integrated double degree course, at any intermediary stage in
integrated double degree course. However, a University may permit
any person to audit any subject or number of subjects by attending
classes regularly and taking the test for obtaining a Certificate of
participation from the University/Faculty according to the rules
prescribed by the University from time to time and given a
certificate therefore. "
The wording of the aforesaid rule is unambiguous and bars any
such splitting of degree. Had the University mended its flaw as highlighted
in Aditya Pratap Duggal's case and awarded Degrees in consonance with
afore cited Rule 13 supra, the present situation would not have arisen; as
also by removing the basis come out of the rigors of the binding nature of
judgment in Aditya Pratap Duggal's case.
36. Hence, considering the overall facts and situation of the present
case, we recommend the University to re-look into the entire issue regarding
awarding of weightage from next session onwards. The dissatisfaction that
the students have regarding the admission process every academic year has
to be ironed out as it is not expected from the students, be it future Lawyers,
to waste their precious formative years in the Courts seeking relief.
27 of 28
CWP No.18084 of 2020(O&M) #28#
In view of the above, finding no merit, present petitions are
dismissed being without any merit.
( JASWANT SINGH )
JUDGE
( SANT PARKASH )
JUDGE
January 04, 2021
Vinay
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether Reportable Yes/No
28 of 28
