Uttarakhand High Court
Km. Kavita Saklani vs H.N.B. Garhwal University on 30 October, 2023
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Writ Petition (M/S) No. 993 of 2023
Km. Kavita Saklani ...Petitioner
Versus
H.N.B. Garhwal University
and another ...Respondents
Present:-
Mr. Susheel Kumar, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. K.H. Gupta, Advocate for the respondent no.1.
Mr. Ravi Bisht, Advocate for the respondent no.2.
JUDGMENT
Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)
The petitioner seeks direction to respondent
no.1 H.N.B. Garhwal University (Central) Srinagar, Pauri
Garhwal ("the University") so as to declare the final result
of the petitioner of her two years B.Ed. Course.
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and
perused the record.
3. It is the case of the petitioner that she
appeared in B.Ed. Entrance Examination conducted by
the University. She was successful under the
Economically Weaker Section ("EWS") category and she
was allotted the respondent no.2/Dronacharaya
Institute of Teachers Education, Haripur, Herbertpur,
Vikas Nagar, Dehradun ("the College"). The petitioner
took admission and cleared first semester, second
semester and third semester examinations. The results
were duly declared by the University, but the fourth
semester result was not declared. The petitioner did
make various representations. Aggrieved by the inaction
of the University, the petitioner filed instant petition.
4. The counter affidavits have been filed by the
respondent no.1 and the respondent no.2. The
respondent no.2 has admitted the petitioner's case that
she belongs to EWS category. She has a certificate.
According to the respondent no.2, the petitioner was
admitted under EWS category and this information was
shared with the University, which at the relevant time
had directed for submission of income certificate. The
certificate was given by the petitioner. Her result was
declared. But, the result of fourth semester of the
petitioner was not declared even after many
representation made by the College.
5. According to the respondent no.2 "it was
orally told that the petitioner cannot be considered
under EWS category as her EWS certificate was not
submitted at that time of admission. Now such
stand of the respondent no.1, the University is
totally arbitrary, illegal and malafide and more so an
act of harassment then an act under law".
6. The respondent no.1/the University also
filed its counter affidavit and categorically in para 3 of the
counter affidavit admitted that the petitioner belongs to
EWS category. In para 3, the respondent no.1/the
University states that the EWS category certificate filed by
the petitioner was sent to Tehsildar, Sadar Tehsil,
Dehradun for verification and thereafter that "the said
verification is received in favour of the candidate on
27.04.2023". It has also been enclosed as Annexure 1 to
the counter affidavit.
7. Learned counsel for the petitioner would
submit that the petitioner has submitted certificate as
required at the time of her admission in the B.Ed. course.
She appeared in the examination and result for first,
second and third semesters were declared, but final
semester result has not been declared.
8. Learned counsel for the respondent no.2,
the College would submit that the result should have
been declared by the respondent no.1/ the University on
time.
9. Learned counsel for the respondent
no.1/University would submit that now EWS certificate is
there, therefore, result may be declared.
10. In fact, there has been no dispute. It is the
case of the respondent no.1/University in its counter
affidavit para 3 that the verification of EWS category
certificate of the petitioner was complete on 19.04.2023.
11. What had prevented the University to
declare the result then? When was the verification to be
done? Why it was not done on time? Even if the
verification was complete on 19.04.2023, why the result
was not declared on the same date? After all it is the
matter of career of a student, who has completed a
professional course like B.Ed. The Court refrains to make
further comment on the working of the respondent no.1/
the University. In such matters, even delay of a day may
divest a candidate to appear or apply for some positions
based on the degree which he had obtained.
12. In fact, there is no dispute now. The
respondent no.1/the University is ready to declare the
result. In view of it, the petition deserves to be allowed.
13. The petition is allowed.
14. The respondent no.1/ the University is
directed to declare the result of the petitioner immediately
without any further delay.
(Ravindra Maithani, J.)
30.10.2023
Jitendra
