53 h7 CWP No8583 of2009 1 Inthe HighCourt ofPunjabandHaryanaat Date ofdecisionl 0804 2010 1 CWPNo8583of2009 SamritiShannaandothers Petitioners Vs m Q GuruNanak Dev Universityandanother 0 2 CWP 9218of2009 Ca3 I JugrajSingh Petitioner C5 VS I GuruNanak Dev and others Z m 3CWP No11867 of2009 tr e I NaveenSingh Petitioner ct5 Vse GuruNanak Dev r0 and another wmo Z 4 CWP N08277 of2009 Qw etitioner Singh VS GuruNanak Dev andanother 5CWP No13363 of2009 C RimpiKumari etitioner VS GuruNanak Dev andanother 6CWP No339 of2009 SahasChopra andanother ePetitioners VS Uma 2014.03.27 11: 25 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 54 k CWP No8583 of2009 2 Guru Nanak Dev andanother 7CWJPNo351of2009 RajivKumar and others Petitioners VS Guru Nanak Dev andanother m Q 8CWP No487 of2009 0 Singhand others Petitioners 0 VS I Guru Nanak Dev C5 and another 9 CWP No9340 of2009 Z SinghAulakh andothers etitioners VS Q Guru Nanak Dev I andanother 05 lOCWPNo04900f2009 oo r SinghVirdi and others Petitioners vm Z VS Guru Nanak Dev Cle andanother 11 CWP No770 of2009 Singhand others Petitioners 1 VS Guru Nanak Dev andanother 12 CWP 9492of2009 Ashish Luna and others Petitioners VS Guru Nanak Dev and another Uma 2014.03.27 11: 25 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 55 1 6 CWP No8583 of2009 3 13CWP No9153 of2009 Navdeep Kaur and others Petitioners VS Guru Nanak Dev andanother 14CWP No9779 of2009 Kumar and another Petitioners 1 VS Guru Nanak Dev 0 andanother C 15CWPNo5140f2009 0 I Sandeep Dhir Petitioner Vs Z GuruNanak Dev andanother C 16CWPNo0038of2009 I 08 Jatin Seth Petitioner VS oo e Guru Nanak Dev Imm3 andanother Z 17 CWPNo9888 of2009 V Rahul Sharma and others Petitioners VS Guru Nanak Dev and others Cer 18CWPNo9644of2009 SiddharthAcharyaand others Petitioners VS GuruNanak Dev andanother 19 CWPNo411of2009 itpal Singhand others Petitioners Uma 2014.03.27 11: 25 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 56 4V CWP No8583 of2009 4 L Versus Guru Nanak Dev UniversityAmritsar and another CORAM HONBLE MR JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI Present MrVeneet Sharma MrAS Manaise Mr Naresh 1 Prabhakar Mr RS Manhas MrSK Rattan MrManuj Q NagrathAdvocates for the 0 MrDS Patwalia Advocatefor the C3 I PERMOD KOHLI J C5 I All these petitionsare beingdisposedof by this Z common order as the facts and of law 111 all these Q petitlons are identical All the in these petitions are the studentsof 08 flO course 1ike Bachelor of Technology 2 Science and Bachelor of Architecture Degree 2 Qm in the Faculties of AppliedSciences and and PhysicalPlanningand Architecture Theywere admittedto the course in theyear 2005 At therelevanttime they C were by the Ordinances framed by the Universityfor from one semester to another semester The eligibility conditions were 111 para 8 of the Appendixof Ordinances for Under Graduate BTechfB Arch Degree in the Faculties of Applied Ce and PhysicalPlanningand Architectur Ordinmce Uma 2014.03.27 11: 25 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document e 4 57 4 CWP No8583 of2009 5 dated 1511 000 ln operationat the time of the admission 1S hereunderl 8 a9 A candidateshall be promoted to the next higllersemester providedhe secures at least 40Io C marks in aggregateof all the courses taken 0 together for that semester even if he fails ln one or 0 more coursels C0 b9 Reappearexaminations for an odd semester I shall be conducted along with the next odd 2 semesterand an even semester alongwith the next a C even semester I 08 C 9 An extra chance shallbe givento a reappear 00 candidate of seventh semester Tech9 9 w Z Semester0B Arch9along with the Qm end semesterexaminationprovidedthe candidate has passedall the courses upto semester C d9 A end semester examinatlon shall be conducted only for eighth BTechl tenth B Arch semester providedthe candidate has passedall the courses upto seventhlninth semester Uma 2014.03.27 11: 25 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 58 CWPNo8583 of2009 6 e9Award of grace marks for these examlnations shall be as per the University Ordinances 99 Under Clause 6aofthe Ordinance a candidatewas entitledto be to the next higher semester if he secures t at least 40Io marks lIl of all courses taken together for thatsemester ifhe fails in one or more courses UIlderClause 0 C for an odd semester shall be conductedalong reappear I C9 with the next oddsemester and even semesteralongwith the next I UnderClause 6c9an extra chanceis to a Cr even semester Z of 7 semester 6BTech99 semester B reappear C 8thand 10 semester examination Arch alongwith a candidatehas all courses upto6 and eighthsemesters 06 ClO under Clause 6l a examinationis to be t 2 Z conductedfor 8th6BTech9andtenth6BArch9semesters QW all the courses upto seventhlninth the candidate has alsoa for awardof gracemarks as semester There is per the Ordinances The Universityamended the Ieeve Ordinances The University has introducedthe cany on system111tbeyear 1999for various underthe Calendar1999Vol III for variouscourses exceptlaw 11 and Technologyfalties and School of Social I I n 1464 I Uma 2014.03.27 11: 25 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 59 47 CWPNo8583 of2009 7 Sciences In respectto the course having8 semesterduration following conditionshavebeenlaid downl 3 Courses havingeightsemester duration a9There shall be no condition for promoting a studentfrom first semester to second semester b1However a studentshall be promotedto third W semester only if he has passedatleast 50Io 0 ofthe Orst two semesters but there C I will be no conditionfor promoting a studentfrom C0 I thirdsemester to fourth semester 9However a student shaIl be to flfth C Z 2 semester onlyif he has passedatleast 50Io ofthe first four semester I 08 d9There will be no condition for promoting a r0 studentfrom fiRh to sixth semester C 7 e9 However a student shall be to 2 e seventh semester onlyif he has passedall the ofthe first two semesters f The student shall be promoted to eighth semester only if he has passedall the G of the 6rst three semesters Aer a periodof eighthsemestersthe student shall be givena periodof two consecutive years more to passfailingwhich he shall have to start the course afreshfrom the first semester However such a Uma 2014.03.27 11: 25 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 60 9 CWP No8583 of2009 8 studentwill not be required to qualifythe entrance 1 test agaille 01 The aforesaidOrdinances6canyon was further amendedby the Syndicate in its meeting held on 13122006 111 thefollowingmanner tm 1 Present Headingl ProtoosedHeading C Carryon Systemfor various iii Carry OIl Systemfor various 0 semester examinations 6exceptlaw semester examlnations 6exceptLaw C and Technology Faculties and School of Social and School of Social Sciences I C5 L 2 I Vide the amendment the cany on systemfor various Z semester examlnations was madeapplicableto the 7 and Faculties as well exceptLaw and School of Social I Sciences However the amendmentwas appliedfrom Session 08 OO 20072008 The her introducedthe amendment lIl ne the carry of B Tech M Tech MCA and MBA S on Z Q years course vide its decision dated 1 82008 wherebythe cany on system was in all the depents exceptLaw and Schoolof Social Sciences for which there are separateOrdinances Vide the aforesaid decision the cany on system was made 46a to theComputer Sciencec and Electronic by way of ther clariflcation of the amendment vide Item No23 in the meetingof the held on 05122006 The are ofthe decision dated Ol082008 the amendedOrdinancesGoveming the cany Uma 2014.03.27 11: 25 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 61 1 CWP No8583 of2009 on system has been appliedto all the courses referred to hereinabove As a consequence of the of carry on systema studentCall be from first semester to second semester without any condition However such a studentcan be to third semester if he has passedat least 50 per cent 1 of the First two semesters For promotion to 4 0 semester no condition 1S Againfor to 5 0 I semestera studentmust pass at least 50 per cent of C5 I the first four semesters Againfor from 5 to 6 Z semester 1Swithoutany condition For to 7 semester a 8lrther embargo created that the student must pass all C lS I of the flrst two semesters Similarlyfor a5 cio to 8 semesters a studentmust qualif all the ofthe wm flrst three thereby a student will not be 2 eligible to seekadmission in 7 semesterifhe has any reappearor Clm of flrst two semesters Same eligibilitycondition will applyfor promotionto 8 semester and if the student has a C reappear or of flrst three semesters he is ineligible to seek admissionin 8 semester Thegrievance of the is that the amendment introducedor theclarification issuedvide order dated 01082008 1S illegaland lIl casesofthe With a view to their contention reliance is placedon the Ordinance Uma 2014.03.27 11: 25 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 62 1w CWP No8583 of2009 10 t dated14112000 lnnexure Pmllwhich was in force at the time of admission which onlyrequired 40 per cent aggregatemarks of all the papers ln a semester of the fact whether a studentfails ln one or more papers of that semesters It is 8lrther contended that carry on which was introduced in the 1 UniversityCalendar 1999 6Vol IID has no to the 0 and Technology Faculties Law and School of Social 0 Sciencesas is evident from Annexure I3 Even the amendment C9 I introducedpursuantto the decision of the Syndicate vide Item Z No3 in the held on 5122006 cany on systemfor the C of and Faculties has been I from Session20072008 It is submittedthat 06 00 Slnce the were admitted 111 the year 2005 this r vm amendmentis againnot applicable to the havingbeen Z Llm made operative from Session 200e2008 as perthe contained in the amendmentOrdinances itself It 1S furthercontendedthat vide orderdatedOl082008 Pe49 r herein the amendment has been applied which has affected the career of the Accordingto the leamed counselfor the had the known that theywould be requiredto clear all the of flrst 213semesters theywould have concentrated on those papers on Nw aller two years the Uma 2014.03.27 11: 25 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 63 e CWP No8583 of2009 11 cannot be punishedfor not havingcleared the papers two years back It 1S the case of the that the operation of the rules is when it takes away any of the rightof the hither to available lll existingstatutellaw Accordingto the the only 1 t for promotion to the seven and eighthsemesters was 0 that a candidateshould secure 40 per cent marks lIl aggregate in a 0 semester of the fact whethera candidatehas failed 111 C5 one or more ofthe papers ofthat semester Z In the replyflled by the respondentliversitythe n Universityhas relied upon the order dated 01 082008 whereby 4t I carry on systemhasbeen appliedto all theunderaduate courses 06 111 the UniversityexceptLaw and School of Social Sciences r wa These two courses beinggoverned by separateOrdinances It 1S Z reiteratedthat any having lIl Lle the flrsttwo semesters is ineligiblefor seekingadmission to 7 semester and a candidatehavingreappear in flrst threesemesters lS to seek admissionin 8 semester It is statedthat as a matter offact order dated Ol082008 is not an amendmento the but onlybyway of clarification as previous Ordinances of 2000 were in this regardand thus necessitateda clarification It is mentionedin the replyflled by the University that some of the who had in reappear Uma 2014.03.27 11: 25 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 64 4r CWP No 8583of2009 e12 examinations on flrst two semesters were admissionto 7 semestersubject to clearanceofthe bacllogofthe flrst two semesters on their fllingof the affidavit that in the event of the failure of the candidateto clear the reappear of fust two the admission to 7 semester could be cancelled m C Similar affldavits were flled by the who 0 securedadmission ln 8 semester while in flrst three C0 I papers It is submittedthat all the admissionsto 7 and C I 8 semesters in respectto the candidates who had of first Z 213semesters were in nature and could be cancelledon m theirfailure to clear thebackog C r I When these petitions were flled interim orders were 08 passedby thisCourt in CWP No8583 of 2009 on 29052009 QO e Vm3 ently in 8 semester Similar orderswere passed in other Z Writpetitions the to seekadmissionin 7 and Qm 8 semesters and also to appearin the examinations om time to time MrD Patwalialeamed counsel for the C has however arguedthat neither the Ordinances carryingon systemare in nature nor the order dated Ol082008 can be construed to have His rther contentionis that the Universityis entitled the rules even duringthecontinuance ofthe Course by a to Uma 2014.03.27 11: 25 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 65 1 CWPN085830f2009 13 studentas theUniversitydoesnot hold a promise to a student not to changethe duration or the manner or method of from one semesters to another exceptchanging the syllabus or a courseof studyfor which a studentmay be entitledto notice The have placedreliance upon a Single 1 ofthis Court reported Pawan Kumar Sharma Vs 0 The State of Puniab and others 1991 Recent Services C I 407 In this case the affiliatingUniversity C bye4aws the condition of passingthe Z examlnatlOnS ln a particularchance Tbe students who are the course at the time of introductionof the t I assailed the action of the University the issue a 08 leamed SingleBench ofthis Court held as followsl rlO r It has been laid down in the above referredtwo 2 Z authorities that the which are Qm applicable at the time a studenttakes admission in the consolidated course would keepon applying of any amendment till the student So admitted completes the course In view of this the were not justifledin applyingthe which were on 16 August 1986 to the studentswho had got admissionin the BAMS course in the flrst year priorto that date 55 Uma 2014.03.27 11: 25 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 66 1 CWP No8583 of2009 14 Reliance is also placedon another Division Bench judgmentof this Court in the caseof Munish Kumar Talwar Vs The Vice Chancellor Baba Farid Universil of Health Sciences and others 2007 29SlR 330 In this case also the rules for BAMS course were amended The amended rules prohibited m tr admissionto final examlnatlOn if there is reappearlIl 0 the second examlnatlOIle The petitioner therein had CA3 I reappear ln second thoughhe was granted admission C5 I to third semester but not to appear in the examinations Z This Court thequestionheld as under m 0 7 The short question that requires determination e4 I ln this case is whether the is to be c6 by the amended or ulvamended ClO r Ordinance The appellanthad been pemittedto V7 2 ltl in the 3 Professional examinationheld tl AprilMay2005 Ifthe originaldurationofthe 3 Professionalhad not been amended the hadcleared the reappearsof the 2 Professional and on that account there was no before him to appear in the final examination wbich was then to be held in November December 2005 As per the appellanthe 1S sufferingon account of the wrong application of theamendedOrdinancein his case Uma 2014.03.27 11: 25 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 67 1 CWP No8583 of2009 15 9 Since the appellant is required to be treatedas belongingto batch of year 2000 as already noticed theprovision ofpara11 above would also come to his rescue When the the course he was entitledto take position that he would be eligibleto clear 1st and i C 2 Profesional by November4Oecember200 0 He reallycould not have any say in fixingthe CA3 I duration of the 3 by amendmentin C theOrdinance afler he had joinedthe course To I C remedy such a situationonlyperhaps the provision Z r ofpara11 ofOrdinance provided that 1 candidatesadmittedpriorto 2001 will appear in final aftertwo years of study It Call 08 0 be noticed that the appellant has studiedwith the C batch in 1 and 2 Professional examinations Z Thus a different duration of the course if being Ll applied to similarlysituated candidates We do riot say that it amounts to discrimination but parity needto be maintainedbetween similarlysituated c candidatesand that is what is soughtto be achievedbyOrdinance above We are thusofthe view that unamendedOrdinance would govern the case ofthe appellant and the provisions of the amended Ordinance cannot be made to him 97 Uma 2014.03.27 11: 25 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 68 1 CWPNo8583 of2009 16e To thecontrary Mr DS Patwalia leamed counsel for the has relied upon Puniab Universitv Vs SubashChander and another 3 Supreme Court Cases 603 In thiscase the had securedadmissionto MBBS course 111 the year 1965 The existing required of 50 per cent marksto pass in eachsubjectIn addition mlnimum 0 to the above there wasa rule for grantof grace marks 0 I uptoone of the total aggregatemarksincludingmarks for C Practicaland internalassessmentif a candidatefails in one or more Z In theyear 1970 an amendmentwas madein the m rules and the award of grace marks was confined to total C marks excludingthe marks for intemal assessment c6 Where a candidatefails ln one or more he has f12 7 in all where a separate of Z also exists In case of BAMSIBDS examination the Q gracemarks of one percentwas conflnedto each subjectand not to of all subjectsThe petitioner who was a studentof lvBS was failing in one He claimed grace marks on the ofunamendedrules but he was awardedgrace markson the basis S Iol basisofthe amendedrules which did not provebeneflcialto him He the samein the andHaryanaHighCourt A r 1 FullBench ofthis Court allowedthe rules atthe e 1 1 orv 2 4 1 2217777 Uma 2014.03.27 11: 25 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 69 r CWP No8583 of2009 17 l applyand the amended rules cannot be applied to thedetrimentofthe candidates Honble theSupreme Court while the 1SSue held as underl 1 1 We do not agree with the leamed Judgesof the Full Bench ofthe HighCourt that thereis any elementof a retrospectlvlty 111 the changebroughtabout by the r addition ofthe exception to Rule 2l ofthe Calendar for 0 C3 the year1970 according tothe Shoner I C5 Oxford EnglishDictionaryThird Edition in relation to I Statutesetc means Operative with regardto pasttime 2 The changebroughtabout by the addition of the exception to Rule 2 l does not say that it shall be operativewith effect from any earlier date It iS 08 obviously It is not possible to hold that it is 0 111 operationmerelybecause though J Z introduced in 1970 it was appliedto Subash Chander tl 1 who appeared for the final examinatloll 111 1974 after he had joinedthe course earlier in 1965 No promisewas made or could be deemed to have been made to him at the time of his admission in 1965 that 44em there will be no alteration of the rule or regulation lll regard to the percentageof marks requiredfor passing anyexamination or award of grace marks and that the rules relating theretowhich were in force at the time of his admission would continue to be appliedto him until hefinishedhiswholecourse 59 Uma 2014.03.27 11: 25 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 70 rr CWPNo8583 of2009 18 12 Therefore we are clearlyofthe opinionthat thereis no of the changein the rule made in the year 1970having operationmerelybecause it was in 1974to SubashChanderwho had joined the MBBScourse in 1965when the rule award of grace marks was different In these circumstances m weaffirm the view of DK Mahajanand PC Jain JJ 0 in the DivisionBenchjudgment in Sewa Ram 0 I V Kurukshetra and disapprove the view taken C5 bythe leamed Judgesof the Full Bench in the decision under in this case and hold that the University Z right in holdingthat SubashChander l was Lr was not entitledto 16 grace marks under the old rule I but was entitled to only4 gracemarksunder the new rule 06 CO and had therefore not passedthe examination ln r We allow the appealbut without any order Z Howeverthis decision will not affect the as to costs Llm resultof the examination of Subash Chander lIl if it had been declaredas per the direction of the learned Judgesofthe Full Bench in the LettersPatent G Appeal The aforesaid was followed by anotherBench of the Court lIl the case of Puniab Universitv Vs DevianiChakrabartiand others 3 Supreme Court Cases 612wherein it has been held as follows Uma 2014.03.27 11: 25 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 71 r CWP No8583 of2009 9 In the presentcase also the new decisionsare pnma facie in operation and theydid not become merelybecausethey appliedto studentswho had already started their educational careers We therefore allow these appealsbut without anyorder as to 1 C costs and set aside the of the High 0 0 Court and dismiss the writ petitionsHowever this decision will not affect the rightwhich might 9 I have been grantedto the petitioners in the writ Cr Z petitions on the basisofthe judgments ofthe High Court which have beenreversedin theseappeals Q 4 A similar issue came to be considered by a Division I a5 Bench of this Court lll the case of Rahul Gupta Vs State of ClO 4t Harvana2000 649SCT 1099 wherein SubhashChanders case 7 Z hasbeenrelied upon and it hasbeenheld as under Clw 4 We have heard leamed counsel for the parties and are of the view that there is no merit in the writ petitionsThe onlyargumentadvancedbythe counsel for the petitioner is that when his client joinedthe diplomacourse in the year 1997 the made it clear that the duration of that course was 3 yearsand the could not change the duration till the students who joined the course in the academic session 199798 had Uma 2014.03.27 11: 25 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 72 CWP No8583 of2009 20 the same He has placedreliance on Full Bench of this Court in Amardeep SinghSahotav StateofPuniabetc 1993 II SLR 6731 1993 441SCT 328 P80 07Bl and SwaranlitSinghand anotherv StateofPuniab and others 1998 21SLR 14 1997 41SCT 511 0 8 1 C H1 FB9 We are unable to agree with the 0 contentionof the petitionerFrom the stand taken 0 I by the it 1S clear that the competent C9 authoritydecided in the year 1995 to revise the I curriculum of Electronics and Communication Z DiplomaCourse to 3112 years consistingof 7 tr semesters The 7 semester includes the ireplant I and the marks awardedto a candidatein 05 rio this training have to be includedin the diploma a awardedto him It is 81rther clear that the Z Director Technical Education Haryanaby his ll communicationdated 180995 informed all the Principals of the Institutesin the Stateof Haryana whichimpartsuch education that the duration of thecourse had been increased to 3112 years and thatthe revised curriculum was to be with effect from the academic session 199586 What happened was that when the prospectus Was issuedfor the academic session 199798 there was an inadvertenterror therein and the duration