IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.14280 of 2010 Jobanpreet Singh & another Vs. Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar & another Present: Mr.S.K.Rattan, Advocate, for the petitioners. ***** RANJIT SINGH, J. The petitioners have filed this writ petition to seek direction that they be admitted to 9th semester of LL.B. (five years course). The petitioners are yet to clear the 5th semester completely. Despite that the petitioners were entitled to be admitted in 7th semester, as they had cleared 8 out of 10 subjects of 5th and 6th semesters. This is so provided in University Calendar and relevant Ordinance in this regard is as under:- “Degree of Bachelor of Laws (Five years course) 6. A candidate shall be allowed to re-appear in the examination of a particular semester within three years of joining the said semester. The examination for re- appear papers of a semester will be held alongwith regular semester examination. 10. A candidate will be promoted to:- (i) Third semester if he/she clear 8 out of 10 papers of the first two semester; (ii) Fifth semester provided he/she clears 8 out of 10 of the 3rd and 4th semester. (iii) Seventh semester provided he/she clears all the papers of first two semesters and 8 out of 10 of the 5th and 6th semester. (iv) Ninth semester provided he/she clears all the papers of first four semesters and 8 out of 10 of the 7th and 8th semesters.” For going to the 9th semester, the petitioners would have to clear Civil Writ Petition No.14280 of 2010 : 2 : semester lower than 7th & 8th and 8 out of 10 subjects of 7th & 8th semesters also. An anomalous situation has arisen in this case. The petitioners have cleared the 7th semester but without clearing 5th semester completely. Full Bench of this Court in Jasdeep Singh Vs. Baba Farid University of Health Sciences, 2009(4) SCT 213 has clearly held that a candidate who has failed in one or more subjects and has been permitted to attend classes in the next higher profession course as per Ordinance and having completed the period of study of said higher profession course, can not be allowed to take the examination of the higher profession course without clearing all the subjects of lower profession course merely because the attempts provided to clearing the lower profession course under the Ordinance are still available. Without clearing the lower course, the petitioners have already cleared the higher semester, which is anomalous situation and was referred to by the Full Bench in Jasdeep Singh's case (supra). The court has held, “If a candidate is allowed to take his fourth consecutive attempt to clear the Lower Professional Examination along with the Higher Professional Examination, as has been claimed by the petitioners, an anomalous situation may arise where a candidate may clear the Higher Professional Examination but may fail to clear the Lower Professional Examination. This would create an absurd situation where despite each professional being an independent and separate entity in itself, leading to a progressive promotion from First Professional to the Second Professional and thereafter Second Professional to the Third Professional, a candidate without passing the Lower Professional Examination clears the Higher Professional Examination, which is neither the intention of the Ordinances nor is it as per the Scheme formulated for the Course.” Unless, the petitioners clear 5th semester, they would not be eligible for advancement to the 9th semester and may have been wrongly allowed to appear in 7th semester. Dismissed. August 12, 2010 ( RANJIT SINGH ) ramesh JUDGE