IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No. 9542 of 2010 Date of decision: 14.12.2010 Saurabh Singla ...Petitioner Versus Punjabi University, Patiala and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH Present: Mr. R.S. Ahluwalia, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. R.L. Sharma, Advocate for respondent No. 1. Mr. P.S. Brar, Advocate for respondents No. 2 and 3. RANJIT SINGH J. The petitioner is a student of B.A. L.L.B. 5 years course and has filed this writ petition to pray for directions to respondent No. 2 to issue roll number and admit card for appearing in 10th semester examination, which took place from 17.05.2010 to 31.05.2010. By way of interim measure, the petitioner was permitted to appear in the examination and has, accordingly, appeared in four papers out of total five of 10th semester. In response to notice, the respondent-University and College have filed reply. It is disclosed that the petitioner ran short of lectures and out of 194 lectures delivered, the petitioner has attended only 76 lectures. Even out of 16 extra classes, which were conducted, the petitioner attended only six classes. It is, accordingly, stated that the petitioner cannot be held eligible to appear in the examination as he is required to attend 75% of the total lectures. The Civil Writ Petition No. 9542 of 2010 -2- respondents would also submit that waiving off the condition of lectures may lead to spoiling the whole education system and such concession invariably lead to undue advantage to the students, who do not attend classes but are still permitted to sit in the examination. What is being stated by the respondents is fully justified and this is required to be respected. The student cannot be permitted to avoid classes and then ask for judicial intervention in their favour. The students must respect law. They cannot be allowed to inculcate habit of violating law and to get away with it. However, to explain the shortage of lectures, the petitioner would make reference to his sickness. As per the petitioner, he was admitted in the hospital on account of severe jaundice and Diarrheoa and so he could not attend the classes for 15 days. It is on account of this that the petitioner would explain the shortage of his lectures. Mr. Sharma appearing for the University has made reference to the representation given by the petitioner, where some contradictory pleas have been raised. It would not be appropriate for this Court to condone the shortage of lectures by judicial intervention. Such decision is to be left to the wise discretion of the Vice Chancellor. He is best equipped to take appropriate decision in exercise of power/discretion in accordance with law. The petitioner has already made a representation as can be seen from the reply. It will be for the Vice Chancellor to consider, if the petitioner has made out a valid case for condoning the shortage of lectures in accordance Civil Writ Petition No. 9542 of 2010 -3- with law. The outcome of the examination in which the petitioner has appeared would depend upon the order passed by the Vice Chancellor. In case the Vice Chancellor decide to condone the shortage of lectures then the result of the petitioner may be declared. Otherwise the petitioner will face the consequences of shortage of lectures in accordance with law. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. December 14, 2010 ( RANJIT SINGH ) rts JUDGE