SBCWP 5866/2007 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR. O R D E R Kumari Neena Sharma V/s. State of Rajasthan & Ors. S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.5866/2007 Date of Order : 20/02/2008. PRESENT HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Dr. R.K. Sharma for the petitioner. Shri A.K. Bhargava for respondent No.3. ****** BY THE COURT:- Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2) This writ petition has been filed with the prayer that respondent No.2 i.e. University of Rajasthan be directed to include the marks secured by the petitioner in B.E. 3rd Semester in the subject of Digital Electronic Lab so as to declare the result of the petitioner. 3) It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that respondent No.3, Kota Engineering College Kota forwarded the OMR mark- sheet of B.E. V for various students vide its letter dated 29/3/2006 to the University of Rajasthan but the marks of the petitioner were not sent on correct proforma which is why they were not included in the original mark-sheet while declaring the result. Respondent No.3-College thereafter corrected its SBCWP 5866/2007 2 mistake and vide another letter dated 3/8/2006 sent corrected OMR Mark-sheet for issue of mark-sheet of 3rd Semester of the petitioner. However, this was not reflected in the mark-sheet issued to the petitioner which indicated zero marks in the subject of Digital Electronics Lab. When the correspondence took place between respondent No.3 Kota Engineering College and respondent No.2 University of Rajasthan, the University vide its letter dated 16/4/2007 conveyed to the college that Vice Chancellor vide order dated 21/3/2007 has himself imposed a penalty of Rs.50,000/- on respondent No.3-College for its failure to send the OMR Mark-sheet of the petitioner in time prior to declaration of the result. Petitioner submitted a representation to the respondents that it was no fault of his that his OMR mark-sheet was not timely sent to or sent on wrong performa. He should not be made to suffer on account of the lapse on the part of the college. 4) Respondent No.2-University has filed its reply in which it has been contended that Vice Chancellor vide his order dated 21/3/2007 has imposed penalty of Rs.50,000/- on the college for its irresponsible act and has directed that result of the petitioner may be declared only after deposition of the amount of penalty. So long the amount of penalty is not deposited, result of the petitioner could not be declared. Respondent No.3- College ignoring the rules and regulations did not SBCWP 5866/2007 3 timely send the marks of students both for practical and written examination of B.E. 3rd Semester/5th Semester. 5) Shri A.K. Bhargava, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.3-College submits that there was no failure on the part of the college. It had timely sent the marks to the University. He further argued that merely because the correct marks were not sent in prescribed performa, it cannot be said that the marks were not sent in time. There is no question of college paying the amount of penalty. 6) Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied on the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in Rupal Agarwal Vs. University of Rajasthan & Ors. (D.B.S.A.W. No.313/07) wherein in similar circumstances, the Division Bench held as under:- “From the record of the case, it is evident that internal assessment mark-sheet was not sent by the respondent No.3-College to the University at the relevant time for which the appellant was not responsible at all. The view taken by the learned Single Judge that the internal assessment mark-sheet was sent by the College to the University much after declaring the result and issuing of the mark-sheet as a result of which the petition was liable to be dismissed, cannot be upheld inasmuch as after the result was declared, the appellant had come to know that her absence was marked as far as subject of Computer Programming Lab was concerned, after which she had approached the College and the College on realizing the mistake had sent internal assessment mark-sheet to the University. In view ofthe stand taken by the respondent No.3-College, there is no manner of doubt that there was bona fide mistake on the part of the College in not sending internal assessment SBCWP 5866/2007 4 mark-sheet to the University for which the appellant cannot be penalised. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that good ground is made out by the appellant for granting the reliefs claimed in the petition.“ 7) In view of the facts of the case and the ratio of the judgment aforesaid, I find that petitioner cannot be penalised for the fault on the part of respondent No.3-Kota Engineering College if the marks were not sent in the prescribed OMR mark- sheet. The fact that marks were sent as such is not disputed. The petitioner therefore cannot be penalised for this reason. In the result, the writ petition is allowed. The respondent No.2-University of Rajasthan is directed to add the marks of the petitioner of the subject of Digital Electronic Lab and issue revised mark-sheet to the petitioner of B.E. 3rd Semester within a fortnight from the date of production of certified copy of the judgment before them. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ), J. anil