HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR DB: Hon'ble Shri Sunil Kumar Sinha & Hon'ble Shri Radhe Shvam Sharmat JJ, Writ Petition (C) No.7627/2011 ^esppndents Vs. 1. Deepak Kumar Chaurasia, S/o. AK Chaurasia, aged about 23 years, R/o. D/23, Nature City Colony, Sakari, Uslapur, Bilaspur District Bilaspur (CG) Indira Gandhi Agricultural University, Raipur, through: its Vice Chanceltor, Indira Gandhi Agricultural University, Raipur (CG) Registrar, Indira Gandhi Agricultural University, Raipur (CG) Veterinary Science and Animal Husbandry College, Anjora Durg, through: its Dean, Veterinary Science and Animal Husbandry College, Aiijora Durg, District Diirg (CG) Dean, Veterinary Science and Animal Husbandry College, Anjora Durg, District Durg (CG) jt Petition Under Article 226 ofthe Constitution of India Present: Shri Manoj Paranjpe, counsel for the petitioner. ORAL ORDER (Passed on 14th December, 2011) Heard on admission. a. The petitioner was admitted to First Year course of B.V.Sc. & A.H. in respondent No.3 college in 2010-11 session. He appeared in first semester examination, but he could not appear in second semester examination as his attendance was less than 50%. I— .y^a., Thereafter, the petitioner made an application on 02.8.2011 for his readmission in the first year B.V.Sc. & A.H. course in 2011-2012 session. The said application of the petitioner has been rejected by respondent No.4 vide impugned orderdated 17.11.2011 (Annexure- P/1). The petitioner has cha!lenged the validity ofthe said order. 3. Shri Paranjpe, learned counsel for the petitioner argued that on account of illness, the petitioner could not attend the classes and could not secure even 50% of attendance while prosecuting his studies in the first year of academic session 2010-11. His submission is that Dean/respondent No.4, without considering the above facts and clrcumstances, has passed the impugned order, which should be quashed. 4. Admittedly, admission etc. to the above faculty and courses are governed by Indira Gandhi Agricultural University Undergradu^fe Academic Regulations 2004. Regulation 9.0 of the above regulations deal with attendance requirements. According to Regulatlon 9.01, the students are required to attend all the theory and practical classes scheduled during the semester and a student is required to attend minimum 75% of the scheduled classes starting from the date of registration to appearing in the examination. There are other related regulations in this regard vide Regulatlons 9.02, 9.03, 9.04, 9.05, 9.06 and 9.07. However, Regulation No.9.08, which is relevant in regard to this writ petition, provides that the students of first year class must have a minimum 50% of attendance in each semester and in each course for readmission in the subsequent academic session. A perusa! of the above regulations, Bini contained in entire Regulation No.9 would show that provisions of Regulation No. 9.08 are independent of all other regulatlons of Regulation No.9. Therefore, the effect of regulation No.9.08 would be that if a student is not having minimum 50% attendance in each semester and in each course in the first year, he would not be entitled for readmission in the subsequent academic year. We are of the view that respondent No.4 has rightly taken a decision as per Regulation No.9.08 and no interference is required by this Court in this matter. 5. For the foregoing reasons, we do not find any substance in the writ petition, which is liable to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed summarily. Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge Sd/- , Radhe Shyam Sharma Judge h