Patna High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6799 of 2013 ====================================================== Suraj Prakash Singh, S/o Dr. Prem Prakash Singh, C/o Sri J.N. Singh Sai Sharnam Neel Kanth Vihar Saveragali College Road, Tiwari Chauk, Deoghar. Versus .... .... Petitioner 1. Vice Chancellor Magadh University, Bodh Gaya. 2. Examination Controller Magadh University, Bodh Gaya. 3. The Director, R.P. Sharma Institute of Technology West Baily Road, Patna-801503. 4. Examination Controller R.P. Sharma Institute of Technology West Baily Road, Patna-801503. 5. Registrar, R.P. Sharma Institute of Technology West Baily Road, Patna-801503.
Legal Reasoning
.... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner : Mr. Raj Dular Sah, Adv. Mr. D.K. Tiwari, Adv. For the Magadh University : Mr. Hansraj, Adv. For the Respondent No.4 : Mr. Brisketu Sharan Pandey, Adv. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MIHIR KUMAR JHA ORAL ORDER 4 01-05-2013 Heard learned counsel for the parties. The prayer of the petitioner in this writ application reads as follows:- “1(a) For issuance of an appropriate writ/writs, direction/directions commanding the respondents authorities to accept the fees and forms of the petitioner for appearing in the ensuing Final/4th year Examination for the Session 2008-2012 of B.Tech. (b) For issuance of an appropriate writ/writs, direction/directions commanding the respondents authorities to allow the petitioner to appear in the ensuing final/4th year examination for session 2008-2012 Scheduled to be commenced in the month of May 2013.” Patna High Court CWJC No.6799 of 2013 (4) dt.01-05-2013 2/5 Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner appeared in the third year examination of the Bachelor of Technology course of the session 2008-2012 and has also passed in all the papers of the third year but he could not pass the one paper of second year in which he had failed in the first examination and also in the next examination. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the Regulation 12 to contend that if such students will be entitled to appear in the examination of the fourth year and the University and college having not permitted him to do so have virtually acted against the provision of the Statute. In this case two counter affidavits have been filed, one by the Magadh University to which the college is affiliated and the other by the college itself, namely, R.P. Sharma Institute of Technology. In both of them, the stand is one and same that as per Regulation 12, the petitioner who had failed in one subject of the second year was required to not only appear but also pass in that failed subject of second year in the next examination and having not done so, he cannot be allowed to appear in the fourth year examination. In the considered opinion of this Court, the stand taken by the University and the college has to be approved. Patna High Court CWJC No.6799 of 2013 (4) dt.01-05-2013 3/5 Regulation 12 for the B. Sc. (Engg.) Examination (Annexur-R/1) to the counter affidavit filed by the University lays down that:- “12(i) It at any examination, a candidate passes in sessional work but fails in not more than three subjects he may be promoted to the next higher class. Such candidates shall be required to appear and pass in the written papers of the subject(s) in which he has failed, in the next examination along with the subjects of the next higher class. If he fails in more than three subjects he may appear as non-collegiate candidate in the subsequent examination, but shall have to appear in all the subjects. If he fails in sessional work, he has to take re-admission. (ii) If a candidate promoted as in (i) above, passes in all the papers (or fails in 3 papers or less) and also passes in the lower examination, his result of the higher examination shall be withheld, till he is declared to have passed the lower examination. However he has the option of appearing in all the papers of the higher class as in (i) above again.” A bare simultaneous reading of the aforementioned provisions would make it clear that the provision of carrying over the paper of a lower examination is only allowed up to the next examination, inasmuch as, Regulation 12(i) very clearly lays down that the students has to appear and pass in the lower subject failing which he could be treated as a non-collegiate student and will be required to repeat all the papers. In view of the above clear provision in the Statute, Patna High Court CWJC No.6799 of 2013 (4) dt.01-05-2013 4/5 this Court does not find any error in the stand taken by the respondents in refusing the permission to the petitioner to appear in the fourth year examination. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that on account of this harsh provision of the Statute, the petitioner will loose one year has to be only noted for its being rejected. Academic matters and academic standards are to be governed by the authority as per the Statute and no individual hardship can be greater than the observance of the Rules laid down for conducting the course. The Statutes intend to only achieve a solemn object of attaining the academic standard in the technical institution and the exception of career offered in a failed subject having limited to his one year in terms of the Regulation 12(i), this Court will not be in a position to issue a direction contrary to the provision contained in the Statute. The next submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that similar concession was given to other students has again no merit, inasmuch as, paragraph no.12 of the writ application first of all is not concerned to the students of the institution in which the petitioner is studying. Secondly, no name has been set out in paragraph no.12 so as to enable the respondents to answer with regard to the plea of discrimination. Finally, this Court in view of the two orders dated Patna High Court CWJC No.6799 of 2013 (4) dt.01-05-2013 5/5 23.8.2012 in CWJC No. 14550 of 2012 and 5.3.2012 in CWJC No. 3583 of 2012 are related to the students of Netaji Subhas Institute of Technology, Bihta and Maulana Azad College of Engineering & Technology, Patna where in this Court had not even taken note of the Regulation 12 (i) as quoted above. Such orders, therefore, cannot be treated to be a binding precedent. In view of the aforementioned discussions, this Court does not find any merit in this application and the same is, accordingly, dismissed. (Mihir Kumar Jha, J) Rishi/-