Sunita Kumari D/O Sh. Sube Singh ... vs Registrar, Raj Rishi Bhartrihari ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 690 Raj/2

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 690 Raj/2
Judgement Date : 19 January, 2023

Rajasthan High Court

Sunita Kumari D/O Sh. Sube Singh ... vs Registrar, Raj Rishi Bhartrihari ... on 19 January, 2023

Bench: Inderjeet Singh

        HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                    BENCH AT JAIPUR

                S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1601/2021

Sunita Kumari D/o Sh. Sube Singh Yadav, Aged About 28 Years,
Resident Of Village Majri Khurd, Post- Majari Kalan, Tehsil
Neemrana, District Alwar, Rajasthan.
                                                                    ----Petitioner
                                    Versus
1.      Registrar, Raj Rishi Bhartrihari Matsya University, Alwar,
        Rajasthan.
2.      Controller Of Examination, Raj Rishi Bhartrihari Matsya
        University, Alwar, Rajasthan.
                                                                 ----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vijay Singh Yadav For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sudhir Yadav

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJEET SINGH

Order

19/01/2023

Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the issue involved

in this writ petition has been considered and decided by the

Coordinate Bench of this Court in the matter of Arpana Singh

Chouhdary Vs. Raj Rishi Matsya University, Alwar & Anr.

(S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.12139/2018) wherein on

06.01.2020, the following order was passed:-

"The grievance raised in the present writ petition is with regard to allowing the petitioner to write her B.Ed Part-II Examination.

The facts, in nutshell, pleaded in the petition are that the petitioner after completing her graduation and MBA had taken admission in B.Ed. Course. The petitioner has pleaded that she appeared in the B.Ed. Part-I Examination and was declared pass in the result dt. 4th

(2 of 3) [CW-1601/2021]

September, 2017. The petitioner has pleaded that after passing B.Ed. Part-I Examination, she was promoted to next year i.e. B.Ed. Part-II and the petitioner after depositing the requisite fee pursued the course and attended the regular classes.

The petitioner has pleaded that in December, 2017, she became pregnant and due to early months of pregnancy, she was advised to take complete bed rest and as such she was not in the position to go for internship and continue it. The petitioner has pleaded that she had filled the Examination form of B.Ed. Part-II and also deposited the examination fees on 11th May, 2018 but the University prevented her to write the Examination of B.Ed. Part-II on the ground of not completing the internship.

The petitioner, at that point of time, approached this Court and this Court by interim order dt. 1st June, 2018, directed the University Authorities to allow the petitioner to participate in the Examination of B.Ed. Part-II and result of the petitioner was to remain subject to decision of the writ petition.

This Court had directed learned counsel for the respondents to bring the result of the petitioner, for perusal of this Court and today counsel has produced the result before this Court of Examination of B.Ed. Part-II and she has been declared pass. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has also completed her internship from Govt. UPS Pathrodia Ka Bas, Block Umrain, District Alwar. Counsel submitted that the petitioner had joined the internship on 13th July, 2018 and completed the same on 24th December, 2018, after undergoing the internship for the required period of 16 weeks.

Counsel submitted that the issue with regard to not completing the internship due to unforeseen circumstances like pregnancy has been considered by this Court in S.B.Civil Writ Petition No.11365/2018 (Anshu Sharma Vs. Raj Rishi Matsya University & Ors.) while passing the order dt.30th May, 2019.

This Court finds that the petitioner has now completed the internship and further she has been declared pass and the

(3 of 3) [CW-1601/2021]

Coordinate Bench has considered the scope of University Ordinance No.326 and 326-A in the order dt. 30th May, 2019 and has held that a candidate should not be deprived from participating in the examination in the subsequent year if prevented from appearing in the examination due to sufficient reason.

This Court finds that the petitioner has already passed the Examination of B.Ed. Part-II and as such her result is required to be declared by the University by publishing the same in accordance with law. The University would also undertake the said exercise of publishing the result and giving mark-sheet to the petitioner within a period of three weeks, from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. The result produced before the Court has been returned back.

Accordingly, the present writ petition stands allowed."

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent-

university has not disputed the submission made by counsel for

the petitioner.

In that view of the matter, this writ petition stands disposed

of in view of the judgment passed by the Coordinate Bench of this

Court in the matter of Arpana Singh Chouhdary (supra). The

university is directed to declare the result of the petitioner.

(INDERJEET SINGH),J

JYOTI /329