🖨️ Print / Download PDF

Alok Namdeo Vs Dr. Hari Singh Gour Vishwavidhyalaya

Case No: Writ Petition No. 12248 of 2011

Date of Decision: Aug. 2, 2013

Hon'ble Judges: Vimla Jain, J; Rajendra Menon, J

Bench: Division Bench

Advocate: Bhoop Singh, for the Appellant; Shobha Menon, Learned Senior Counsel and Shri Rahul Choubey, Learned Counsel for Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 and Shri Rajesh Maindiretta, Learned Counsel, for the Respondent

Final Decision: Dismissed

Translate: English | हिन्दी | தமிழ் | తెలుగు | ಕನ್ನಡ | मराठी

Judgement

1. The petitioner has filed this writ petition and the following reliefs are claimed:

(A) This Hon''ble High Court may kindly be pleased to issue the writ in the nature of mandamus, certiorari or other and command the respondent

nos. 1 and 3 and direct them to give provisional admission to the petitioner till the receiving of his mark sheet for class 12th C.B.S.E. Board Ajmer.

(B) The Hon''ble High Court may kindly be directed the respondent no. 3 to keep vacant one sheet for petitioner for his admission ion the faculty

of B.B.A. 1st year in Dr. Hari Singh Gour University, Sagar.

(C) Any other relief/writ/order which this Hon''ble Court deem fit and proper may also be granted in favour of the petitioner.

Records indicate that the petitioner was a student who was studying in Kendriya Vidhyalaya, Cantt. Sagar and was to appear in Class 12th

Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSC) to be conducted in the academic session 2008-09. However, when the petitioner was not

permitted to appear in the examination on the ground that the petitioner is having less attendance, the petitioner approached this court in W.P. No.

7071/2009 and an interim order was passed directing the Board to permit the student to appear in the examination. Thereafter notices were issued

and the Central Board of Secondary Education, the Board has filed a detailed reply and point out that according to attendance particulars of the

petitioner, the petitioner has only 58.8% attendance, the minimum attendance required for appearing in the examination is 75% and as the

competent authority is only entitled to condone attendance upto the extent of 60% shortage, the respondents expressed their inability to give any

benefit to the petitioner. Taking note of the totality of the circumstances on 30/06/2011, the W.P. No. 7071/2009 was disposed of by this court

with a direction that the Joint Commissioner of the Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan, situated in New Delhi and the Central Board for Secondary

Education Ajmer, shall consider the claim of the petitioner in accordance to the Rules and if permissible relaxation be granted and result declared.

They were directed to take a decision within a period of 45 days.

2. Grievance of the petitioner now is that in pursuance to the aforesaid directions issued petitioner''s absence or shortage of attendance has been

condoned and his result for 12th class C.B.S.E. has been declared but as result has declared only after the last date for admission to the BBA

course was over, the petitioner seeks a direction as prayed for hereinabove.

4. Smt. Shobha Menon, learned Senior Counsel for respondent nos. 1 and 2 has filed a reply and it is stated that for the admission to the BBA

course, even though the petitioner had appeared in the entrance examination and cleared the same but as the petitioner had not passed the

qualifying examination i.e. 12th class examination conducted by the Board of Secondary Education and did not produce the mark sheet before the

cut off date i.e. 05-08-2011, it is said that the University could not grant admission to the petitioner for the course in question after the cut off date

as on the said date petitioner did not fulfil the eligibility criteria.

5. As far as declaration of the result by the Central Board of Secondary Education is concerned, the respondent no. 4 has filed a detailed reply

and it is pointed out that after the order passed by this court on 30-06-2011 was presented alongwith the documents before the Assistant

Commissioner, Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangthan, Jabalpur, the matter was referred to the college and the Principal, Kendriya Vidyalaya No. 1 Sagar

submitted its comments and attendance particulars vide Annexure R. 4/1 only on 26-07-2011. The matter was thereafter was processed by the

Chairman of the Central Board of Secondary Education Delhi and the shortage of attendance was condoned by the Chairman on 17-08-2011,

which was intimated to the petitioner.

6. The respondents have given particulars of the action taken by them and say that as certain administrative formalities were to be completed, they

had taken action after condoning the attendance of the petitioner, therefore, result could not be declared within 45 days, Document Annexures

R4/1 to R4/4 are filed in this regard, which go to show that the matter was being processed and the delay originally occurred because the

Principal, Kendriya Vidyalaya No. 1 Sagar only forwarded the matter to the Board on 26-07-2011 vide Annexure R4/1. Be that as it may be the

fact remains that the relief claimed by the petitioner in this writ petition is that he be granted admission in the BBA Course conducted by Dr. Hari

Singh Gour Vishwavidyalaya. The BBA Course has commenced in the year 2011 and the cut off date for seeking admission after qualifying in the

examination i.e. 12th class was 05-08-11. Admittedly on 05-08-2011, the petitioner did not fulfill the qualification, in fact his entitlement to appear

in the examination itself was doubtful and it was only decided on 17-08-11 when the Chairman of the Board condoned the shortage of attendance

and directed for declaring of the result. That being so as the petitioner did not fulfill the minimum criteria for seeking admission to the BBA Course

on the cut of date fixed i.e. 05-08-2011, we see no reason for grant any benefit to the petitioner. If the petitioner feels that due to delay caused by

the respondents in declaring the result after condoning his absence, he is entitled to any compensation he is free to claim the same afresh in

accordance with law but in the present petition the only prayer made is to direct the respondents to give admission to the petitioner in BBA

Course, as this cannot be done now, we see no reason to grant any relief. That apart in this case the student is to be blamed for the entire matter or

all the complications are due to the shortage of attendance at his instance. In view of the above, this petition stands dismissed.