SAW310/2010 // 1 // IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR JUDGMENT IN D.B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No.310/2010 In S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.10941/2009 University of Rajasthan, Jaipur through its Registrar Versus Shiv Charan Lal Bairwa and Mahatma Gandhi College of Education, Jaipur Date of Order ::: 09.11.2010 Present Hon'ble the Acting Chief Justice Mr. Arun Mishra Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mohammad Rafiq Dr. Y.C. Sharma with Shri Anand Swaroop Vyas, Counsel for appellant Shri Jai Kishan Yogi, Counsel for petitioner- respondent #### By the Court:- This intra-court appeal has been preferred by University of Rajasthan calling in question legality of order dated 10.03.2010 passed by Single Bench of this Court allowing writ petition directing Registrar of the University to declare result of petitioner- respondent of B.Ed. Examination, 2009. Facts, in short, are that petitioner- respondent belongs to Scheduled Caste Category; he appeared in Pre Teachers Entrance Test (PTET) held for year 2008-09; since he SAW310/2010 // 2 // qualified in said test, he was given admission in Mahatma Gandhi College of Education, Jaipur in B.Ed. course. After getting admission in said college, petitioner-respondent persuaded his studies in B.Ed. course and attended classes from 03.01.2009 to 07.01.2009. On 08.01.2009 he fell ill and could not continue his studies. On 31.01.2009 when he resumed his studies, he submitted medical certificate of having fallen ill. He undertook half-yearly examination and also filled examination form for B.Ed. Session 2008-09. He was prevented from sitting in final examination on ground of shortage of attendance as he had only attended 30 classes out of 180. It was necessary to attend 75% of classes so held in an academic session. Petitioner-respondent was provisionally permitted to appear in the examination vide order dated 02.09.2009 of this court and thereafter his result was called by the court and it was observed that petitioner has passed the examination. Stand of University was that petitioner- respondent had attended only 30 classes out of 180. He remained absent in 150 classes. 75% attendance was necessary. Reliance has been placed on decision dated 05.12.1995 of this SAW310/2010 // 3 // Court in Damodar Prasad Goyal Vs. Smt. P.L. Kushwaha and Others (S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.4557/1994). Thus, petitioner-respondent was rightly disallowed from appearing in the examination. Single Bench relied upon medical certificate and granted relief prayed for of declaring result. Aggrieved by said order, this intra-court appeal has been preferred by respondent-appellant University of Rajasthan. Dr. Y.C. Sharma with Shri Anand Swaroop Vyas, learned counsel appearing on behalf of University, has submitted that in view of shortage of attendance, petitioner-respondent could not have been permitted to appear in examination muchless his result could have been declared. It was necessary to attend 75% of classes as per guidelines issued by University of Rajasthan. The counsel has submitted that mark-sheet has been supplied pursuant to order passed by Single Bench in Civil Contempt Petition No.573/2010 on 27.08.2010. Supply of mark-sheet has been made subject to decision to be rendered in this intra-court appeal. Shri Jai Kishan Yogi, learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner-respondent No.1 has submitted that unlawful demand was SAW310/2010 // 4 // raised by the College in question, consequently attendance in classes which were attended to by petitioner-respondent no.1 were not given. Petitioner-respondent was ill also as such no case for interference in the order passed by Single Bench is made out. It is not in dispute that 75% attendance is necessary to appear in the examination. University has issued guidelines of minimum attendance of 75% under directions of University Grants Commission (for short, 'UGC') to be enforced in the College/Department strictly. Said direction was issued by University in view of Civil Writ Petition No.4557/1994 decided on 05.12.1995. Thereafter University has issued guidelines to ensure attendance of students to 75% as required by UGC. Aforesaid guidelines were issued on 19.11.1997. Thus, it was necessary to attend 75% of classes in order to be eligible for appearing in examination of B.Ed. course. Petitioner-respondent has come up with case that he attended classes from 03.01.2009 to 07.01.2009 and from 08.01.2009 to 30.01.2009 he could not attend the classes due to illness. Thus, for 22 days he was unable to attend the classes due to illness. Even if period of SAW310/2010 // 5 // illness is taken into consideration, total attendance would come to 52 classes (30+22), whereas attendance of 75% was necessary and actual 30 classes cannot be said to be sufficient by any stretch of imagination to allow a student to appear in main examination. Thus University was right in not permitting petitioner-respondent no.1 to appear in main examination. Merely appearance in main examination under interim order passed by Single Bench or supply of mark-sheet to him in contempt proceedings is of no consequence as it was made dependent on outcome of result of instant intra-court appeal, the petitioner- respondent no.1 not entitled to reap fruits due to supply of mark-sheet and declaration of result in those proceedings. In Contempt Petition No.573/2010 decision was rendered on 27.08.2010 therefore impugned order was complied with by the University. It is also pertinent to mention that norms and standard for bachelor of education programme has also been laid down by NCTE. It has been prescribed that there shall be at- least 200 working days each year exclusive of the period of examination and admission out of which at-least 40 days shall be for practice SAW310/2010 // 6 // teaching or skill development in nearby schools. Institution shall work for a minimum of 36 hours in a week during which physical presence in the institution of all teachers and student teachers is necessary. Aforesaid guidelines also fortifies the view which we have taken. Thus submission raised by Shri Jai Kishan Yogi, learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner-respondent no.1 that unlawful demand of money was made by the College cannot be accepted for singular reason that no such averment has been made in writ application which has been filed before Single Bench. Only ground taken was of ailment for 22 days. Even if period of 22 days are condoned, the attendance is much short. Thus, we are of opinion that impugned order is liable to be set-aside. Similar view has been taken by this Court in order dated 26.04.2007 in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.4712/2006 – Varun Chauhan Vs. University of Rajasthan and Others. Resultantly, writ appeal is hereby allowed. Impugned order dated 10.03.2010 is set-aside. Writ petition is ordered to be dismissed. Petitioner-respondent no.1 shall surrender original mark-sheet so issued to him SAW310/2010 // 7 // within a period of three weeks from today to the University. Shri Jai Kishan Yogi, learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner-respondent no.1, has prayed that petitioner-respondent no.1 may be permitted to pursue B.Ed. course and to give main examination on completion of requisite attendance. Prayer being reasonable is hereby allowed. Petitioner, in case is able to complete attendance in the current academic session, be permitted to appear in exam. No costs. (Mohammad Rafiq) J. (Arun Mishra) Acting CJ. //Jaiman//