Civil writ Petition No.4419 of 2010 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil writ Petition No.4419 of 2010 Decided on : 27.7.2010 Vivek Ghai & others .... Petitioners VERSUS Guru Nanak Dev University & another .... Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH. 1.Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2.To be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3.Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest ? -.- Present: Mr. Veenet sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Amit Rao, Advocate for Mr. Amrit Paul, Advocate, for the respondents. RANJIT SINGH, J. The petitioners are the students of Master of Technology (computer Science & Engineering) (Integrated Course) run by Guru Nank Dev University. All the petitioners were admitted to this course during July 2006. At the time of admission of the petitioners, the said course was governed by the provisions of Ordinance issued in the year 2000. Copy of the relevant provisions of the Ordinance for Under Graduate B.Tech./B.Arch. Degree Programmes in the Civil writ Petition No.4419 of 2010 -2- Faculties of Applied Sciences, Engineering & Technology and Physical Planning & Architecture are annexed with the petition as Annexure P-1. As per the said regulation, the promotion of the candidates to next higher semester was on the basis of securing 40% marks in aggregate of all the courses taken together, even if a candidate had failed in one or more courses. The petitioners appeared in the 6th Semester during May, 2009. He has got more than 40% marks in all the Semesters, result of which has been declared by the University. However w.e.f. 1.8.2008, a carry on system has been introduced for the new admission. The carry on system has now been implemented retrospectively on all the students, who were admitted in the year 2007-08. The petitioners would make a grievance in this regard that the provisions of this Regulation have been made applicable to them without affording any opportunity of hearing. The petitioners would also plead that the existing position in regard to the applicability of Rules and Regulations, cannot be changed retrospectively to their prejudice. Reference in this regard is made to a decision in C.W.P. No.4672 of 2009, where similar prayer made by the students has been disposed of. These petitioners were permitted to continue the training in 8th Semester. Reference is also made to a decision in C.W.P. No.3463 of 2010, where provisional admission was granted to some students to continue 8th Semester on 26.2.2010. The Ordinance dated 15.11.2000, which was to apply to the case of the petitioners has been reproduced and reads as under:- “8. a) A candidate shall be promoted to the next higher Civil writ Petition No.4419 of 2010 -3- semester provided he secures at least 40% marks in aggregate of all the courses taken together for that semester even if he fails in one or more course/s. b) Reappear examinations for an odd semester shall be conducted along with the next odd semester and an even semester along with the next even semester. c) An extra chance shall be given to a reappear candidate of seventh semester (B.Tech) 9th Semester (B.Arch) along with the eighth/tenth end semester examination provided the candidate has passed all the courses upto sixth/eighth semester. d) A supplementary end semester examination shall be conducted only for eighth (B.Tech)/tenth (B.Arch) semester provided the candidate has passed all the courses upto seventh/ninth semester. e) Award of grace marks for these under-graduate examinations shall be applicable as per the University Ordinances.” It is accordingly, pleaded that the only condition, which was to govern promotion to the next semester, was to secure 40% marks in aggregate in all the courses. The petitioners claim that they have more than 40% marks in each of the semesters in which they have appeared. It is, accordingly, pleaded that there was no Civil writ Petition No.4419 of 2010 -4- condition contained in the Ordinance that the petitioners were to clear all the papers of first two semesters for seeking admission in the next higher semester. The petitioners have been refused admission to the 8th Semester on the basis of a new Regulation, now introduced making the provision for carry on system. University has also decided to implement the carry on system from the session 2007-08. Notice of motion was issued. No reply has been filed. Counsel for the University has appeared and has very fairly pointed out that this issue is no more res-integra and submits that relief claimed in the present writ petition is covered by the decision of this court in C.W.P. No.19113 of 2009 decided on 22.4.2010. In fact, the controversy has been decided by the court vide judgment dated 8.4.2010, where on consideration of this issue, it has been held as under:- “Even though the carry on system under challenge in the present writ petitions deserves no interference in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court in Punjab University Vs. Subhash Chander and another and Punjab University Chandigarh Vs. Devjani Chakrabarti and others (supra), nor it can be said that the decision to introduce carry on system mid course is retrospective in operation. However, the fact remains that the University in its wisdom chose to grant special chance to ineligible candidates for clearing first and second semester examinations and were also granted Civil writ Petition No.4419 of 2010 -5- admission to 7th and 8the semesters with clearing the backlog papers. This decision has been applied selectively and not uniformally. This action of the University is impermissible in law and is an arbitrary exercise of power, deserves no appreciation. The university as an Institution has to act in an non-arbitrary manner providing equal opportunity to all. The Action of the University do not suggest so. Some of the similarly situated candidates have been granted the benefit of special chance and admissions to the higher semesters despite their ineligibility under the carry on system, whereas others have been denied similar relief. In view of the above circumstances, the petitioners cannot be treated differently and with hostility. They shall also be entitled to the special chance granted to other similarly situated students for clearing the papers of first and second semesters on uniform pattern. Their right to admission to 7th/8th semesters, respectively, cannot be denied to them. These petitioners are, accordingly, allowed in the following manner:- (i)such of the petitioners who have not availed special chance for clearing first and second semesters re-appear, will be provided special chance for the purpose; (ii)admissions granted to the petitioners to 7th/8th semesters under the interim orders of this Court, Civil writ Petition No.4419 of 2010 -6- shall stand regularised; (iii)result of the petitioners who have appeared in 7th/8th semesters examination, shall be declared; (iv)those who have been denied admissions in 7th/8th semesters on account of non-clearance of second/third semesters examinations, shall be granted admissions to 7th/8th semesters, as the case may be, and on completion of the course, their result shall be declared; (v)this relaxation shall be available to all students who have reached 7th/8th semesters upto academic session 2009-10 or till such time the decision of the University taken vide letter No.1737-DAA dated 01.08.2008, shall remain in operation, it is however, open to the University to uniformally apply the carry on system to all the disciplines covered by carry on system by properly notifying to the students.” The present petitioners shall also be entitled to same relief as granted in the aforesaid petition. Let the case of the petitioners be also considered in the same terms and an appropriate order be passed accordingly. The present writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of in the above terms. July 27, 2010 ( RANJIT SINGH ) monika JUDGE