HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARILAT^ILASPUR Writ petition (C) No. 608 of2009 PETITIONER: Kumari Pallavi Sahu Versus RESPONDENTS: Vice Chancellor and others O R D ER POST ON ^ MARCH, 2009 Sd/- DhirendraMishra Judge •'•'.--••-*??w.iS •^•^se^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Writ @etition (C) No. 608 of 2009 PETITIONER: Kumari Pallavi Sahu D/o H.K. Sahu, aged about 22 years, Qtr. No. 424, Road No. 5, Steel Colony, Nehru Nagar (West) Bhilai (CG) Versus RESPONDENT: 1. 2. 3. Vice Chancellor, Pt. Ravishankar Shukl University, Raipur (CG) Registrar, Pt. Ravishankar Shukl University, Raipur (CG) Principal, Bhilai Mahila Mahavidyalay, Hospital Sector, Bhilai Nagar, Distt. Durt (CG) SB: Hon'ble Shri Dhirendra Mishra, J. Present: Shri S.P. Kale, with Shri Vinod Deshmukh, Adv. for the petitioner. Shri Neeraj Choubey, Advocate for respondents No. 1 and 2. Shri C.R. Sahu, Advocate for the respondent No. 3. O R D ER (DeUvered on 26 March, 2009) The petitioner has filed the instant petition and prayed for quashment of the letter dated 23-12-2008 whereby his examination form for the main exammation, 2009 has not been accepted by the respondents - University on the ground that the same was received after the last date prescribed for the same and for direction to the respondents to accept his examination form and to allow her to appear in the examination of M. Sc. Final Chemistry for the academic year 2008-09. _-^ r ^^"^•'y-s.^t. * I 1 ^ •. lj 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was a regular student of M. Sc. Final Chemistiy in Bhilai Mahila Mahavidyalaya, Hospital Sector, Bhilai Nagar. She was suffering from Typhoid and, therefore, she could not submit her examination form till 20th October, 2008, the last date with late fee for submission of examination form. She submitted applications on 1st and 3rd November, 2008 to the Registrar to allow her to submit examination form with late fee, however, her form was not accepted. The respondents-authorities are vested with the power to accept the examination form even after the last date. Her examination form was duly forwarded by the College administration with recommendation as the petitioner could not submit the form within time due to sickness, however, fhe respondents arbitrarily did not accept her examination form without assigning any reason. Referring to Ordinance No. 6, which deals with Examinations (General) Part I Clause 20, it was argued that the Kulpati is empowered to allow an application which is otherwise complete in all respects to be entertained with late fee, even though the same is received after expiry of 15 days of the last date, in appropriate cases where he is satisfied that the delay in submitting the application was not due to lake of diligence on the part of the candidate. It was vehemently argued that the respondent No. 2 declined to entertain the examination form of the petitioner on the ground of delay without considering the reasons assigned by the petitioner for the delay and thus, he failed to exercise the jurisdiction vested in him under the statute and Ordinance applicable to the University. 3. On the other hand, the respondents No. 1 and 2 - University, in their return as well as oral, argument contended that 4th October, 2008 was notified as the last date for submission of the examination form for regular students vide notification dated 1-9-2008. The candidates were permitted to submit their examination form with late fee by 2Qth October, 2008. From the petitioner's own submission, she was suffering from Typhoid from 29-9-2008 and thus she was attending the classes tUl then and thus she was not diligent in submitting her examination form. Apart froin this, a regular candidate desirous of appearing in examination is also eligible to appear in the examination provided he has attended 75% of the total classes of the academic year. Her record of attendance was also requisitioned and on perusal of the same, it would be evident that her attendance was only 65% in the academic year 2008-09. The University is requu-ed to scrutinize the examination form and complete other necessary formalities such as preparation of time table for examination, allotment of roll numbers, dispatch of question papers and answer sheets, etc. The practical examination has already been held in the month of February, 2009 and there is no provision of re-examination of the same. The annual examination is to commence from 27th March, 2009. The petitioner has no legal right to submit her examination form after the last date fixed for submission ofthe same. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. 5. From the documents available on record, it appears that the examination form of the petitioner was submitted through fhe respondent No. 3 on 5th November, 2008. The same was duly forwarded by the Principal of the College. From the medical certificate, it appears that the petitioner was suffering from Typhoid from 29-9-2008, From the note sheet (Annexure P-6), it appears that the application was forwarded on 10-11-2008. Thereafter, information regarding her attendance was requisitioned from the Principal of the College. The Principal in his report apprised the University that her attendance was 65% before 29-9-2008 and thereafter, the application was not accepted by the Vice Chancellor with a note that fhe matter has already been discussed in the Executive Council. 6. It is true that the Vice Chancellor of the University is empowered to accept the examination form even after fhe same is submitted after the last date for acceptance of examination form with late fee as per Clause 20 of the Ordinance No. 6. The University took the decision not to accept the examination form after it was informed by the College that her attendance was 65% before she fell sick on 29-9-2008. It also appears that after 29-9-2008, the petitioner was on medical leave for 3 months. The question for consideration in this petition is whether at this juncture, it would be appropriate to direct the University to accept the examination form of the petitioner and permit her to appear in the annual examination. 7. Keeping in view the undisputed fact fhat the practical examination has already been conducted in the month of February, 2009, the annual examination is to commence from 27th March, 2009 and furfher considering that apart from late submission of fhe examination form, the short of attendance of the petitioner prior to her falling sick has also been considered by the University in non- entertaining her examination form, this Court is of the opinion that to allow the prayer of the petitioner to appear in the examination for the academic session 2008-09 would not be proper in the facts and circumstances of the case. 8. For the aforesaid reasons, the petition fails and the same is accordingly dismissed. Sd/- DhireadraMishra Judge