Rajasthan High Court

Meghraj Prajapat Son Of Shri ... vs Rajasthan University Of Health ... on 9 November, 2022

Bench: Mahendar Kumar Goyal

        HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                    BENCH AT JAIPUR

                   S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15329/2022
Mohit Katara Son Of Shri Sukh Lal Katara, Aged About 24 Years,
R/o Ward No. 4, Kovadiya Fala, Dambola, Dungarpur, Rajasthan.
                                                                                   ----Petitioner
                                              Versus
1.       Rajasthan University Of Health Sciences, Jaipur Through
         Its Registrar, Sector 18, Kumbha Marg, Pratap Nagar,
         Jaipur.
2.       The       Examination            Controller,         Rajasthan          University          Of
         Health Sciences, Jaipur Sector 18, Kumbha Marg, Pratap
         Nagar, Jaipur.
                                                                             ----Respondents

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 16290/2022

Sanjay Gurjar S/o Babu Lal, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Niwaru Road, Lalchandpura, Vinayak Vihar Colony-I, Lalchandpura, Jaipur (Raj.) 302012.

----Petitioner Versus

1. Rajasthan University Of Health Sciences (Ruhs), Through Its Vice Chancellor, Address- Sector 18, Kumbha Marg, Pratap Nagar, Jaipur (Rajasthan)

2. Controller Of Examinations, Address- Office Of Controller Of Examinations, Rajasthan University Of Health Sciences, Sector 18, Kumbha Marg, Pratap Nagar, Jaipur (Rajasthan).

3. Symbioisis Institute Of Nursing, Jaipur Through Its Principal Address- 262/329, Sector 26, Pratap Nagar, Jaipur (Raj.) 302033.

----Respondents

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15241/2022

Mr. Atmaram Choudhary S/o Mr. Dwarka Prasad Choudhary, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Pasrotiya, Tonk, Rajasthan 304001

----Petitioner

(D.B. SAW/1180/2022 has been filed in this matter. Please refer the same for further orders)

(2 of 10) [CW-15329/2022]

Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Vice Chancellor Rajasthan University Of Health Science, Jaipur Rajasthan.

2. Rajasthan University Of Health Science, Jaipur, Through Controller Of Examination.

----Respondents Connected With S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15032/2022 Shadab Kureshi S/o Mohd Iliyas Kureshi, Aged About 27 Years, R/o 1/20, Azad Nagar, Jawahar Nagar, Jaipur (Raj.) 302004

----Petitioner Versus

1. Rajasthan University Of Health Sciences (Ruhs), Through Its Vice Chancellor, Address - Sector 18, Kumbha Marg, Pratap Nagar, Jaipur (Rajasthan)

2. Controller Of Examinations, Address - Office Of Controller Of Examinations, Rajasthan University Of Health Sciences (Ruhs), Sector 18, Kumbha Marg, Pratap Nagar, Jaipur (Rajasthan)

3. Shahnaj College Of Nursing, Jaipur Through Its Principal, Address - Village - Kalyansar, Mahla, Ajmer Road, Jaipur.

----Respondents S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15049/2022 Hasan Rasheed S/o Mohammed, Aged About 27 Years, R/o Moholla Sadat, Toda Road, District Tonk (Raj) 304502

----Petitioner Versus

1. Rajasthan University Of Health Sciences (Ruhs), Through Its Vice Chancellor Address Sector 18, Kumbha Marg, Pratap Nagar, Jaipur (Rajasthan)

2. Controller Of Examinations, Address Office Of Controller Of Examinations, Rajasthan University Of Health Sciences, Sector 18, Kumbha Marg, Pratap Nagar, Jaipur (Rajasthan)

3. Shahnaj College Of Nursing, Jaipur Through Its Principal, Address Village - Kalyansar, Mahla, Ajmer Road, Jaipur.

(D.B. SAW/1180/2022 has been filed in this matter. Please refer the same for further orders)

(3 of 10) [CW-15329/2022]

----Respondents S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15051/2022 Meghraj Prajapat Son Of Shri Harlal Prajapat, Aged About 26 Years, Resident Of Village And Post Nangalbani, Tehsil Thanagaji, District Alwar (Raj.)

----Petitioner Versus

1. Rajasthan University Of Health Science, Kumbha Marg, Pratap Nagar, Sanganer, Jaipur (Raj.) Through Its Vice Chancellor.

2. Controller Of Examination, Rajasthan University Of Health Science, Kumbha Marg, Pratap Nagar, Sanganer, Jaipur (Raj.)

3. Principal, Superking College Of Nursing, Bad Ke Balaji, Ajmer Road, Jaipur (Raj.)

----Respondents S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15063/2022 Ramavtar Meena S/o Kanhaiya Lal Meena, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Village Allapura, Tehsil Uniyara, District Tonk (Raj.). 304024.

----Petitioner Versus

1. Rajasthan University Of Health Sciences, Through Its Vice Chancellor, Address- Sector 18, Kumbha Marg, Pratap Nagar, Jaipur (Rajasthan).

2. Controller Of Examinations, Address- Office Of Controller Of Examinations, Rajasthan University Of Health Sciences, Sector 18, Kumbha Marg, Pratap Nagar, Jaipur (Rajasthan).

3. Mother Teresa Nursing And Paramedical Institute, Through Its Principal, Address- 123-124, Gurjar Ki Thadi Mansarovar, Jaipur, Rajasthan 302020.

----Respondents

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15127/2022 Dheeraj Singh S/o Shri Mahhendra Singh Choudhari, Aged About 26 Years, R/o Bhavan Salpura Road, Kawai, District Baran Rajasthan.

(D.B. SAW/1180/2022 has been filed in this matter. Please refer the same for further orders)

(4 of 10) [CW-15329/2022]

----Petitioner Versus

1. The Rajasthan University Of Health Sciences, Jaipur Through Its Registrar, Sector -18, Kumbha Marg, Pratap Nagar, Tonk Road, Jaipur (Raj.)

2. Controller Of Examination, Rajasthan University Of Health Sciences, Jaipur, Sector -18, Kumbha Marg, Pratap Nagar, Tonk Road, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

----Respondents

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15395/2022 Yogendra Son Of Mr. Rai Singh, Aged About 28 Years, Resident Of Amarsar, District Churu, Rajasthan.

----Petitioner Versus

1. Rajasthan University Of Health Sciences, Jaipur, Rajasthan, Through Its Registrar.

2. Controller Of Examination, Rajasthan University Of Health Sciences, Jaipur, Rajasthan.

3. S. Tech College Of Nursing, Near Dev Narayan Circle, Patel Nagar, District Bhilwara, Rajasthan, Through Its Principal.

----Respondents S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 15696/2022 Devendra Kumar Rajoria S/o Shri Rajenda Prasad Rajoria, Aged About 25 Years, R/o Near Govt. School, Ward No. 3, Jaitusar, Tehsil Khandela, District Sikar.

----Petitioner Versus

1. The Rajasthan University Of Health And Science, Sector 18, Kumbha Marg, Pratap Nagar, Tonk Road, Jaipur Through Its Registrar.

2. The Controller Of Examination, Rajasthan University Of Health And Science, Sector 18, Kumbha Marg, Pratap Nagar, Tonk Road, Jaipur

3. The Rajasthan College Of Nursing, Nawalgarh Road, Sikar Through Its Principal.

----Respondents

(D.B. SAW/1180/2022 has been filed in this matter. Please refer the same for further orders)

(5 of 10) [CW-15329/2022]

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sunil Kumar Singodiya, Mr. Hemant Taylor, Mr. Prakhar Sharma, Ms. Komal Kumari Giri, Mr. Arvind Kumar Arora, Mr. Bajrang Sepat, Mr. Salim Khan, Mr. Arafat Hussain, Mr. Tushar Panwar, Mr. Sultan Singh Kuri For Respondent(s) : Mr. Virendra Lodha, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Raunak Singhvi & Mr. Rachit Sharma

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL Order

09/11/2022

Since, these writ petitions share common facts and questions

of law, they have been heard together and are being decided vide

this common order.

In all these cases, the petitioners, who are students of B.Sc.

(Nursing) four years course, were admitted in the course in the

year 2013. They are aggrieved of the action of the respondent,

Rajasthan University of Health Sciences (for brevity- 'RUHS')

whereby, they have been denied permission to write the remaining

papers(s) of B.Sc. (Nursing) course, examination-2022.

The contention of the learned counsels for the petitioners is

that since, after their admission in the year 2013, examination for

the first time took place in the year 2015 and not in the year

2014, the Ordinance, 299-V-10 does not come in way of

permitting them to write the remaining papers(s) in the

examination-2022. They submit that although, the judgment of a

co-ordinate Bench of this Court in case of Fauran Singh Vs. RUHS

and Anr.: S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.10298/2019 and other

connected matters, has been stayed by a Division Bench of this

Court in D.B. Special Appeal Writ No.77/2021; but, since mere

(D.B. SAW/1180/2022 has been filed in this matter. Please refer the same for further orders)

(6 of 10) [CW-15329/2022]

stay does not wipe out its effect as the special appeal is still

pending, this Court must allow these writ petitions on the basis of

judgment in case of Fauran Singh (supra). They, therefore, prayed

that the writ petitions be allowed and action of the respondent-

RUHS be quashed and set aside which may be directed to permit

them to write the remaining papers of B.Sc. (Nursing) four years

course in examination-2022.

Per contra, learned Senior Counsel for the RUHS submits that

as per the amended as also under the un-amended provision of

Ordinance 299-V-10 of the University of Rajasthan Ordinances,

the course of B.Sc. (Nursing) is required to be completed within

maximum eight years. He submits that since, the petitioners could

not complete the same within the aforesaid period, they are not

entitled to appear in the remaining paper(s). Refuting the

contention of the learned counsels for the petitioners that since

their first exam of B.Sc. (Nursing) course was conducted in the

year 2015 instead of the year 2014, they are entitled for one more

chance, he submits that the examination of B.Sc. (Nursing) Part-1

was scheduled in the month of December, 2014 and was delayed

by a month only and hence, the restrictions imposed by the

Ordinance cannot be relaxed. Learned Senior Counsel would

further submit that in the wake of Covid-19 pandemic situation,

the petitioners were given additiional chance upto April, 2022 to

clear the due paper(s) but they failed therein also. He submits

that since the judgment of the co-ordinate Bench of this Court in

case of Fauran Singh has been stayed by a Division Bench of this

Court, no relief can be extended to the petitioners based on that

judgment. He, therefore, prays for dismissal of the writ petitions.

Heard. Considered.

(D.B. SAW/1180/2022 has been filed in this matter. Please refer the same for further orders)

(7 of 10) [CW-15329/2022]

Indisputably, as per Ordinance 299-V-10, a candidate of

B.Sc. (Nursing) course is required to complete it within a period of

eight years. Although, Part-1 examination of B.Sc. (Nursing)

course for the students admitted in the year 2013 was conducted

in the month of January, 2015, which was scheduled in the month

of December, 2014; still, the period of eight years, even if counted

from the year 2015, comes to an end in year 2021 and hence, the

respondent has rightly denied the petitioners permission to write

the due paper(s) in ensuing examination-2022. The petitioners

have even failed to clear the due paper(s) in the extended chance

given upto the month of April, 2022.

It is trite law that Court should not interfere in the academic

discipline.

A three judges Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court has, in

the case of State of Maharashtra vs. Vikas Sahebrao Roundale and

Ors. (1992)4SCC435, held as under:

"12. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Slackening the standard and judicial fiat to control the mode of education and examining system are detrimental to the efficient management of the education. The directions to the appellants to disobey the law is subversive of the rule of law, a breeding ground for corruption and feeding source for indiscipline. The High Court, therefore, committed manifest error in law, in exercising its prerogative power conferred under Article 226 of the Constitution, directing the appellants to permit the students to appear for the examination etc."

Similarly, the Hon'ble Apex Court in case of State of Tamil

Nadu and Ors. vs. St. Joseph Teachers Training Institute and Ors.

(1991)3SCC87, held as under:

(D.B. SAW/1180/2022 has been filed in this matter. Please refer the same for further orders)

(8 of 10) [CW-15329/2022]

"6.xxxxxxxxxxxx The Court declared that the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 32 or of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution should not be frittered away for such a purpose. In A.P. Christians Medical Educational Society v. Government of Andhra Pradesh and Anr.

MANU/SC/0046/1986 : [1986]2SCR749 a similar request made on behalf of the institution and the students for permitting them to appear at the examination even though affiliation had not been granted, was rejected by this Court. The Court observed that any direction of the nature sought for permitting the students to appear at the examination without the institution being affiliated or recognised would be in clear transgression of the provision of the Act and the regulations. The Court cannot be a party to direct the students to disobey the statute as that would be destructive of the rule of law. The Full Bench noted these decisions and observations and yet it granted relief to the students on humanitarian grounds Courts can not grant relief to a party on humanitarian grounds contrary to law. Since the students of unrecognised institutions were legally not entitled to appear at the examination held by the Education Department of the Government, the High Court acted in violation of law in granting permission to such students for appearing at the public examination. The directions issued by the Full Bench are destructive of the rule of law. Since the Division Bench issued the impugned orders following the judgment of the Full Bench, the impugned orders are not sustainable in law.

In another case of University Grants Commission and Ors.

vs. Neha Anil Bobde (Gadekar) (2013)10SCC519, the Hon'ble

Apex Court, held as under:

"31.We are of the view that, in academic matters, unless there is a clear violation of statutory provisions, the Regulations or the Notification issued, the Courts shall keep their hands off since those issues fall within the domain of the experts. This Court in University of Mysore v.

(D.B. SAW/1180/2022 has been filed in this matter. Please refer the same for further orders)

(9 of 10) [CW-15329/2022]

C.D. Govinda Rao MANU/SC/0268/1963 : AIR 1965 SC 491, Tariq Islam v. Aligarh Muslim University MANU/SC/0623/2001 : (2001) 8 SCC 546 and Rajbir Singh Dalal v. Chaudhary Devi Lal University MANU/SC/7924/2008 : (2008) 9 SCC 284, has taken the view that the Court shall not generally sit in appeal over the opinion expressed by expert academic bodies and normally it is wise and safe for the Courts to leave the decision of academic experts who are more familiar with the problem they face, than the Courts generally are.

Their Lordships in the case of National Board of Examinations

vs. G. Anand Ramamurthy and Ors. (2006)5SCC515, held as

under:

"6. We have carefully considered the submissions made by both the learned Senior Counsel. In our opinion, the High Court was not justified in directing the petitioner to hold examinations against its policy in complete disregard to the mandate of this Court for not interfering in the academic matters particularly when the interference in the facts of the instant matter lead to perversity and promotion of illegality. The High Court was also not justified in exercising its power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to merge a past practice with decision of the petitioner impugned before it to

give relief to the respondents herein.

A co-ordinate Bench of this Court, in case of Rishiraj Sharma

and Ors. Vs. Raj. University of Health Sciences and Ors.:

MANU/RH/0067/2009, held as under:

"8. Suffice is to say that Ord. 272 does not give absolute power to the Vice Chancellor to act in contravention of MCI Regulations, 1997, according to which, the term of MBBS course is being regulated; and even if at one point of time, Vice Chancellor considered to grant students of Part-I MBBS course in July, 2007 as a special chance which in no manner can be considered as a precedent being cited for all times to come. It is

(D.B. SAW/1180/2022 has been filed in this matter. Please refer the same for further orders)

(10 of 10) [CW-15329/2022]

always expected from the authority to exercise its discretion judiciously and within parameter of law. If one is not permitted to appear in Part-II MBBS (Prof.) examination unless he completes 3 rd, 4th & 5th semester each of six months duration in terms of MCI Regulations, 1997 - period prescribed under which could not have been relaxed by the authority even in exercise of powers under Ord. 272 of the University. Granting special chance in the opinion of this Court will be in contravention of MCI regulations, 1997, which certainly cannot be permitted under law. This Court does not find any error committed while rejecting request of petitioner for grant of special chance vide order impugned."

In the backdrop of the aforesaid legal position, this Court is

not inclined to extend the petitioners any other chance to write

the due paper(s) in violation of the mandate of Ordinance 299-V-

Reliance placed by the learned counsels for the petitioners on

the judgment in case of Fauran Singh and other connected

matters is misplaced as the same has been stayed by a Division

Bench of this Court vide its order dated 18.05.2022 passed in D.B.