Rajasthan High Court
Kajal Saini D/O Bachchu Singh ... vs Coordinator, Ptet 2020 on 11 March, 2022
Bench: Mahendar Kumar Goyal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13094/2021
Kajal Saini D/o Bachchu Singh Saini, Aged About 21 Years, R/o
Bhudagate, Deeg, District Bharatpur (Raj.).
----Petitioner
Versus
1. Coordinator, PTET 2020, Rajasthan University, Jaipur.
2. The Principal, Government Dungar College, Bikaner
(Rajasthan) India P.T.E.T.-2020.
3. College Of Bharti Teacher Training Mahila College, NH 11,
Lalsot Road, Tehsil Nangal Rajawthan, Badagavon, District
Dausa Through Its Principal.
4. Registrar, Rajasthan University, Jaipur.
----Respondents
Connected With
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 12888/2021
Chetna Sharma D/o Govind Sahai Sharma, Aged About 20 Years,
R/o Village And Post Salempur, Tehsil Sapotra, District Karauli.
----Petitioner
Versus
1. University Of Rajasthan, J.L.N. Marg, Jaipur Through Its
Registrar.
2. Controller Of Examination, B.Ed.-2021, University Of
Rajasthan, J.L.N. Marg, Jaipur.
3. Director, Bharati Teacher Training Mahila College, NH-11A,
Lalsot Road, Badagavon, Dausa.
4. Principal, Bharati Teacher Training Mahila College, NH-
11A, Lalsot Road, Badagavon, Dausa.
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. S.K. Gupta, Senior Advocate with
Mr. Narendra Kumar Saini and
Mr. V.D. Agnihotri for
Mr. Jeetendra Kumar Pandey
(2 of 5) [CW-13094/2021]
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Indresh Sharma,
Mr. Ajit Maloo and
Mr. R.K. Paliwal for
Mr. R.A. Katta
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL
Order
11/03/2022
Although, the matters have come up on applications filed by
the respective parties but, the writ petitions were heard finally at
this stage as directed by this Court vide order dated 09.03.2022.
Since, these writ petitions share common facts and involve
common question of law, they were heard together and are being
disposed of vide this common order.
In both the writ petitions, the petitioners, students of B.Ed.
in the respondent no.3-college, have been denied permission to
appear in the B.Ed. Part-I Examination-2021 on account of
shortage of attendance. While, in the SBCWP no.13094/2021,
nothing has been stated with regard to either shortage of
attendance or the reason for such shortage; in the SBCWP
No.12888/2021, it has been stated that she was misbehaved with
by the college administration and after resolution of the dispute,
she started regularly appearing in the college. It is also stated that
she could not attend the college on account of Covid-19 since
April, 2021 and also for the reason that she suffered from Typhoid
in January, 2021 and August, 2021. It is, therefore, prayed in the
writ petitions that the respondents may be directed to permit
them to appear in the B.Ed. Part-I Examination and to complete
their course.
(3 of 5) [CW-13094/2021]
The respondents have, in their reply, submitted that none of
the petitioners had the requisite attendance and hence, in view of
provisions of the Ordinance 323 of the University of Rajasthan,
they were not permitted to appear in the examination. It is stated
that notices were issued to the petitioners to attend the college
regularly lest on failure to secure the minimum attendance
required, they would not be permitted to undertake the
examination. It is averred that while the petitioner-Kajal Saini has
submitted her affidavit (Annexure-R/4/6), stating therein that she
has not attended the college on her own from 08.02.2021 to
18.08.2021 and she would be liable if her attendance falls short of
the requisite criteria, the petitioner-Chetna Sharma has submitted
an affidavit dated 09.03.02021 stating therein that she would
regularly attend the college from 09.03.2021 onwards and she
would be responsible if there is shortfall in her attendance.
Drawing attention of this Court towards the affidavit of the
Principal of the Institute (Annexure-R/1/1), learned counsels
submitted that only 3 students could not appear in the
examination on account of shortfall in the attendance; otherwise,
rest 47 students were eligible qua the attendance parameter and
hence, it does not lie in the mouth of Ms. Chetna to say that she
could not attend the college on account of Covid-19. They,
therefore, prayed for dismissal of the writ petitions.
Reiterating the submissions made in the writ petitions,
learned counsels for the petitioners contended that the petitioners
are eligible and entitled for appearance in the B.Ed. examination
as well as to pursue and complete the course. They, therefore,
prayed that the writ petitions be allowed in terms prayed for.
(4 of 5) [CW-13094/2021]
Per contra, learned counsels for the respondents contended
that since the petitioners have failed to secure the requisite
attendance in terms of Ordinance 323 of the University of
Rajasthan, they are not eligible and entitled to appear in the
examination and pursue the course further.
Heard. Considered.
Ordinance 323 of the University of Rajasthan reads as under:
"No candidate shall be allowed to appear in the B.Ed.
examination part-I and II unless he/she has attended
(80% for all course work & practicum, and 90% for
school internship)."
Indisputably, none of the petitioners had the requisite
attendance enabling them to appear in the B.Ed. Examination
Part-I. While, the petitioner in SBCWP no.13094/2021 has not
assigned any reason for not attending the college; rather, has
concealed that she received the notices to attend the college and
has submitted her affidavit (Annexure-R/4/6) stating that she
failed to attend the college from 08.02.2021 to 18.08.2021 on her
own, the reason assigned by the petitioner in SBCWP
no.13094/2021 cannot be countenanced inasmuch as out of 50
students of B.Ed. Part-I in the respondent no.3-Institution, 47
students have fulfilled the attendance criteria. It is trite law that if
a student does not fulfill the attendance criteria, the Court cannot
come to his/her rescue in its writ jurisdiction in absence of any
provision for relaxation. A Division Bench of this Court in case of
Kunj Bhihari Saini & Anr. vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.: D.B.
Special Appeal Writ No.954/2021, vide its order dated
11.11.2021, dismissed the special appeal against dismissal of the
writ petition by the learned Single Judge wherein the petitioner
(5 of 5) [CW-13094/2021]
has sought permission to appear in the examination despite failing
to secure minimum required attendance. Another Division Bench
judgment of this Court dated 12.07.2019 in case of Manoj Kumar
Mundotia & Ors. vs. University of Rajasthan & Ors.: D.B.
Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No.1481/2018 held that a
candidate who has failed to complete the required minimum
attendance, cannot be permitted to appear in the examination.
In view of the aforesaid undisputed facts and in the backdrop
of judgment of this Court, the writ petitions deserve to be
dismissed.
The writ petitions are dismissed accordingly. The pending
applications also stand disposed of accordingly.
(MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL),J
MADAN/Lakshya/336-337
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
