Patna High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12743 of 2013 ====================================================== 1. Kunal Kumar, Son Of Shri Jwala Prasad Sharma, Resident Of Village- Gopalpur, P.S.- Naubatpur, District- Patna 2. Kumari Ragini @ Ragini Kumari, D/O Sri Indubhushan Singh, Resident Of Village- Maur, P.S.- Barbigha, District- Sheikhpura 3. Swati Sri Pandey, D/O Priyaranjan Kumar Pandey, Resident Of Village- Chapra Colony, New Area Jakkanpur, P.O.- G.P.O., P.S.- Jakkanpur, District- Patna 4. Ashok Kumar, S/O Sri Ravindra Nath Thakur, Resident Of Village- Godhna, P.S.- Bachhwara, District- Begusarai .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. Kameshwar Singh Darbhanga Sanskrit University, Kameshwar Nagar, Darbhanga Through Its Registrar 2. The Vice Chancellor, Kameshwar Singh Darbhanga Sanskrit University, Kameshwar Nagar , Darbhanga 3. The Registrar, Kameshwar Singh Darbhanga Sanskrit University, Kameshwar Nagar, Darbhanga 4. The Examination Controller, Kameshwar Singh Darbhanga Sanskrit University, Kameshwar Nagar, Darbhanga .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== with Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12858 of 2013 ====================================================== 1. Kumari Sundaram , D/O Shri Upendra Sharma, Resident Of Near Tarang Press, Back Of Amit Palace, Shiv Puri, Boring Road, P.O. + P.S. - Shastri Nagar, District - Patna 2. Shashin Shekhar Jha, S/O Shri Ashok Kumar Jha, Resident Of Village + P.O. - Chhathaar Via Tarapur, P.S. - Shambhuganj, District - Banka Versus 1. Kameshwar Singh Darbhanga Sanskrit University, Kameshwar Nagar, .... .... Petitioner/s Darbhanga through its Registrar. 2. The Vice Chancellor, Kameshwar Singh Darbhanga Sanskrit University, Kameshwar Nagar, Darbhanga. 3. The Registrar, Kameshwar Singh Darbhanga Sanskrit University, Kameshwar Nagar, Darbhanga. 4. The Examination Controller, Kameshwar Singh Darbhanga Sanskrit University, Kameshwar Nagar, Darbhanga. .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== with Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12859 of 2013 ====================================================== Kumari Pritam , D/O Late Ram Sewak Singh, Resident Of Rannu Chak Makandpur , P.S. - Nath Nagar, District - Bhagalpur
Legal Reasoning
Patna High Court CWJC No.12743 of 2013 (5) dt.12-11-2013 2/9 .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. Kameshwar Singh Darbhanga Sanskrit University , Kameshwar Nagar , Darbhanga through its Registrar 2. The Vice Chancellor, Kameshwar Singh Darbhanga Sanskrit University, Kameshwar Nagar, Darbhanga. 3. The Registrar, Kameshwar Singh Darbhanga Sanskrit University, Kameshwar Nagar, Darbhanga. 4. The Examination Controller, Kameshwar Singh Darbhanga Sanskrit University, Kameshwar Nagar, Darbhanga.
Legal Reasoning
.... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : (In CWJC No.12743 of 2013) For the Petitioner/s : For the Respondent/s : (In CWJC No.12858 of 2013) For the Petitioner/s : For the Respondent/s : (In CWJC No.12859 of 2013) For the Petitioner/s : For the Respondent/s : ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 5 12-11-2013 Learned counsel for the petitioners is permitted to make
Decision
correction in paragraph no. 10 of the writ petition i.e. C.W.J.C. No. 12859 of 2013. He submits that inadvertently in the third line after B.A. instead of “without” it has been typed as “with”. He may correct the same. Since all the aforesaid three writ petitions pertains to same reliefs and same questions were involved, all the writ petitions were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. Of-course, in two writ petitions i.e. C.W.J.C. Nos. 12858 of 2013 and 12859 of 2013 no counter affidavit has Patna High Court CWJC No.12743 of 2013 (5) dt.12-11-2013 3/9 been filed, but learned counsel for both the parties have agreed that same question is involved and counter affidavit , which has been filed in the first writ petition i.e. C.W.J.C. No. 12743 of 2013 will serve the purpose for disposal of all the three writ petitions. Heard Sri Arun Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Satyam Shivam Sundaram, learned counsel, who has appeared on behalf of respondents / Kameshwar Singh Darbhanga Sanskrit University (hereinafter referred to as “University”). The petitioners, have prayed for quashing of orders contained in Annexure -1 Series to the writ petition issued under the signature of Examination Controller of the University, whereby, application form of the petitioners for appearing in entrance test for admission in B.Ed. course for the session 2013- 14 has been rejected. At the very outset it is made clear that examination was to be held on 9.7.2013 and it has been accepted by both the parties that examination has already been held, and as such, primarily, there was no point for proceeding in the present matter but keeping in view the fact that a bench of this court by order dated 8.7.2013 while declining from granting any interim relief Patna High Court CWJC No.12743 of 2013 (5) dt.12-11-2013 4/9 had made it clear that if the claims of petitioners are found to be correct and their denial was found to be on non est ground, this court may give direction for holding special examination for the petitioners, the matter was heard at length. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that it is true that petitioners are having B.A. degree but without Sanskrit and earlier as per decision taken by the Senate the candidates were allowed to appear in the examination even without Sanskrit and as such, in view of the decision of the Senate i.e. Annexure -6 Series the rejection of application form of the petitioners by the respondents was unauthorized and on non est ground their applications were rejected. He submits that it is a fit case for directing the respondents to hold special examination for the petitioners after accepting their application form. In the first case a counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondents / University and position has been clarified in paragraph no. 3 of the counter affidavit. It would be appropriate to quote the averment made in paragraph no. 3 of the counter affidavit, which is sufficient to settle the dispute. “3. That before giving parawise reply to the statement made in the writ application, a brief facts of the case on behalf of the answering respondent is set out here-in after as:- I. That minimum criteria for appearing at the B.Ed Entrances Exam is Shastri Degree Patna High Court CWJC No.12743 of 2013 (5) dt.12-11-2013 5/9 (traditional) or B.A. with Sanskrit as one of the subject. II. That an amendment was made to the criteria at serial no. 1 by the Advisory Committee of the university on 10.05.2010 followed by the decision of the Academic council on 13.05.2010. III. That the senate on 06.01.2012 & 07.01.2012 approved the decision of the that academic council dated 13.05.2010 candidate passed B.A. without Sanskrit but appeared at the partial exam with one of the shastri subjects will be allowed to appear at the B.Ed Exam. IV. That since 2010 such students as without Sanskrit at degree level exam but appeared at partial examination were allowed in anticipation of the approval by the Hon’ble Chancellor provided that they shall produce the mark-sheet at the time of admission. V. That a letter bearing letter no. BSU- 27/2013-472/GS (i) dated 28.04.2013 has been received from Chancellor’s office in which it is in that “No action be taken mentioned the hon’ble anticipation of approval by Chancellor………………” university to Up till now the University took actions in anticipation of the approval of the Hon’ble Chancellor but the aforesaid letter prohibits the in anticipation of the approval. Thus the students not having required criteria were restrained from appearing in B.Ed examination held on 09.07.2013.” take any action In view of stand taken it is evident that earlier without approval of the Chancellor candidates having B.A. degree without Sanskrit were being allowed to appear in examination, but after issuance of instruction vide Annexure –A to the counter Patna High Court CWJC No.12743 of 2013 (5) dt.12-11-2013 6/9 affidavit i.e. instruction issued by the Governor’s Secretariat, Bihar, without approval of Chancellor the University stopped entertaining application form of candidates who were B.A. without Sanskrit. Sri Sundaram, learned counsel for the university, while opposing the prayer of the petitioners submits that it is true that in earlier session such candidates were allowed to appear in the examination in view of the decision of the Senate, which has got no assent of the Chancellor, but subsequently, after issuance of instruction vide Annexure -A to the counter affidavit i.e. letter no. BSU-27 / 2013-472/GS(I) dated 28th April, 2013, whereby, it was clarified that “no action be taken in anticipation of approval by the Hon’ble Chancellor and proposals requiring the Hon’ble Chancellor’s approval may kindly be sent well in advance, complete with all details”. The University in compliance with the direction of the Governor’s Secretariat, Bihar, stopped entertaining such applications and as such, since petitioners were B.A. without Sanskrit their applications were rejected. Of-course, in the communication no detail reason has been assigned but in the counter affidavit it has been clarified that they were not possessing requisite qualification, and as such, their applications were rejected. He Patna High Court CWJC No.12743 of 2013 (5) dt.12-11-2013 7/9 further submits that the Bihar State Universities Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) clarifies that without assent of the Chancellor no statute attains its finality. Referring to Annexure -6 Series he submits that earlier without approval of the Chancellor such applications were entertained but after issuance of Annexure -A that was in consonance with the provision contained in Section 39(2) , there was no question for entertaining such applications. It is appropriate to quote Section 39 of the Act, which is as follows:- “39. Regulations, how made. – (1) Subject to the provisions of this Act, the Statutes and the Ordinance, Regulations may be made to provide for all or any of the following matters, namely- (a) the courses of study to be laid down for all degrees and diplomas of the University; (b) the condition under which students shall be admitted to the degree or diploma the courses and university and shall be eligible for such degrees and diplomas; the examinations of to (c) the formation of departments of teaching in the Faculties; the (d) conditions and mode of appointment and duties of examiners and the conduct of examinations; (e) the standard of teaching to be maintained in the colleges; and (f) all matters which by this Act, the Statutes or the Ordinances are to be or may be provided for by Regulations. (2) (i) A Regulation made by the academic Council under sub-section (1) shall be forwarded, as soon as may be, to the Syndicate for transmission to the Senate, and Patna High Court CWJC No.12743 of 2013 (5) dt.12-11-2013 8/9 the Syndicate shall duly forward the same to the Senate with such recommendations, if any, as it may wish to make and shall have no power to return for reconsideration, unless such Regulation, in the opinion of the Syndicate relates to matters which directly or indirectly, affect the finances of the university. the Academic Council to it 2[(ii) Such a regulation shall have effect from the date on which it has been assented to by the Chancellor on being passed by the Senate with or without amendment, or from any date fixed by the Chancellor: Provided that at any time except when the Senate is in session, if the Academic Council makes a Regulation and considers its immediate enforcement necessary, the Academic Council may recommend through the Syndicate, to the Chancellor accordingly and Chancellor with such amendment as he think proper shall direct by a notification published in the Gazette that the Regulation shall come into immediate effect, but such a Regulation shall cease to be effective on the expiry of seven days from the date of the next meeting of the Senate, unless confirmed by the Senate: Provided further that if any Regulation made by the Academic Council under the preceeding proviso, involves expenditure from the University funds, the Regulation shall be forwarded to the Chancellor with the advice of the Financial Adviser. 1[Provided that any regulation having financial implication shall not be Enforceable unless prior approval of State Government has been obtained.”] (3) Where the Syndicate has returned to the academic Council a Regulation made by it and the Academic Council on reconsideration of the matter does not agree with the Syndicate the Academic Council may refer the matter to Patna High Court CWJC No.12743 of 2013 (5) dt.12-11-2013 9/9 the Senate through the Syndicate and thereupon the Senate may either confirm the Regulation or amend or reject it.” Neither in the writ petition nor at the time of argument learned counsel was in a position to satisfy the Court that earlier decision of the Senate was ever approved by the Chancellor and as such in view of the fact particularly the instruction issued vide Annexure - A to the counter affidavit, the court is of the opinion that while rejecting the candidature the respondents have committed no error. Moreover, the examination for which application forms were entertained and rejected has already been held in the month of July, 2013, and as such, no relief can be granted. All the aforesaid writ petitions stand rejected. Praful/- (Rakesh Kumar, J)