76 1 J CWP No8583 of2009 1 In theHighCourt ofPunjalo andHaryana at Dateofdecision 0804 2010 1 CWPNo8583of2009 SamritiSharmaand others Petitioners Vs m Q GuruNanak Dev Universityandanother 0 CWP9218of2009 c I JugrajSingh Petitioner 9 VS GuruNanak Dev andothers Z n 3CWP No1867of2009 L71 I NaveenSingh Petitioner 08 Vs GuruNanak Dev C12 andanother mwo Z 4 CWP No9277of2009 Q Singh Petitioner VS GuruNanak Dev andanother 5CWPNol33630f2009 C RimpiKumari ePetitioner VS GuruNanak Dev andanother 6CWP No9339 of2009 SahasChopra andanother Petitioners 4e VS 4 1 Uma 2014.04.02 16: 08 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 77 CWPNo8583 of2009 2 Guru Nanak Dev andanother 7 CWPNo351of2009 Riv Kumar andothers Petitioners VSe GuruNanak Dev andanother m 8CWP No487 of2009 L 0 Singhand others Petitioners C VS I GuruNanak Dev C5 and another I 9 CWP No 9340of2009 Z SinghAulakh and others Petitioners VS lr GuruNanak Dev andanother r c8 10CWPNo0490 of2009 CQ SinghVirdi and others Petitioners een Z VS 4 GuruNanak Dev CL andanother 11 CWPN09770 of2009 Singhand others Petitioners 4 VS GuruNanak Dev UniversityAmritsar andanother 12 CWP94920f2009 AshishLuna and others J2etitioners VSe GuruNanak Dev Universit4mritsar andanother Uma 2014.04.02 16: 08 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 78 1 CWP No8583 of2009 3 13 CWPNo9153 of2009 Navdeep Kaur and others Petitioners vs Guru Nanak Dev and another 14CWP No9779of2009 W Kumar and another Petitioners VS Guru Nanak Dev 0 andanother C 15 CWP No8514 of2009 C Dhir Petitioner 4 Vs Z Guru NanakDev and another r 16CWPNo10038of2009 08 Jatin Seth Petitioner VS e4 Guru Nanak Dev 1I2 and another 1 17 CWP No9888 of2009 CL Rahul Sharma and others Petitioners VS Guru Nanak Dev and others 2eeee 18 CWP No644 of2009 SiddharthAcharyaandothers Petitioners VS Guru Nanak Dev and another 19CWPNo94110f2009 AmritpalSinghand others Petitioners Uma 2014.04.02 16: 08 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 79 CWPNo8583of2009 4 Versus GuruNanak Dev UniversityAmlitsar andanother CORAM HONBLE MR JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI Presentl MrNeneet Sharma MrAS Manaise Mr Naresh 1 Prabhakar Mr RS Manhas MrSK Rattan MrManuj Q NagrathAdvocates for the 0 MrDS Patwalia Advocatefor the C43 I PERMOD KOHLI J 0 All these petitionsare beingdisposedof by this Z common order as the facts and of law 111 all these petltlons are identica I All the in thesepetitions are the studentsof 08 10 course like Bachelor of Technology mm Science and Bachelor of Architecture Degree 2 fl Progre in the Faculties of AppliedSciences and and PhysicalPlanningand Architecture Theywere admittedto the course in the year 2005 At therelevanttime they C were by the Ordinances framed by the Universityfor from one semester to anothersemester The eligibility conditions were ln para 8 of the Appendixof Ordinances for Under Graduate BTechlB Arch Degree in the FacuIties of Applied c0 and PhysicalPlanningand Architectur Ordinance Uma 2014.04.02 16: 08 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 4 80 1P CWPNo5830f2009 5 dated 15 l l 2000 in operation at the time of the admission 1S hereunderl al A candidateshall be promoted to the next highersemester providedhe secures at least 40Io a marks in aggregateof all the courses taken C2 0 for that semester even if he fails in one or C0 more coursels I C5 b9Reappearexaminations for an odd semester I shall be conducted along with the next odd Z semesterand an even semester alongwith the next m tr even semester I 05 C 9 An extra chance shall be givento a reappear CQ t candidate of seventh semester BTech9 9th S7 2 Semester6B Arch9along with the Clo end semester examinationprovidedthe candidate has passedall the courses upto semester C d A end semester examination shall be conducted only for eighth6BTechll tenth 6B Arch9semester providedthe candidate has passedall the courses upto seventhlninth semester Uma 2014.04.02 16: 08 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 81 9V CWPN085830f2009 6 1 e9Award of grace marks for these examlnatlOns shall be as per the Ordinances Under Clause of the Ordinance a candidatewas entitledto be to the next highersemester if he secures 1 at least 400Iomarks 111 of all courses taken together for C that semester ifhe fails in one or more courses Under Clause6b9 0 0 for an odd semester shall be conductedalong reappear C9 withthe next odd semester and even semesteralongwith the next I semesterUnder Clause 6c9an extra chanceis to a t even Z reappear candidate of 7 semester BTech9 9 semester m Arch with 8 and 10 semester examination a Z candidatehas all courses upto6 and eighthsemesters 08 ClQ under Clause 6d9a examination is to be 4 r 2 for 8 03Tecl andtenth6BArch9semesters Ll the candidatehas passedall the courses upto seventhlninth semester There is alsoa provisionfor award of gracemarks as per the Ordinances The Universityamended the C Ordinances The Universityhasintroducedthe ca on Il systemlIl theyear 1999for various fwultieslpentslunderthe 11 11 n Calendar 1999Tol HI fol variouscourses exceptlaw fln I Technologyfacultiesand School of Social 1 9151390 e n Io Uma 2014.04.02 16: 08 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 82 1 W CWP No583 of2009 7 Sciences In respectto the course having8 semester duration followingconditionshavebeenlaid downl 3 Courses havingeightsemester duration a9There shall be no condition for promoting a studentfrom flrst semester to second semester b1However a studentshall be to third m C semester only if he has passedatleast 50Io 0 0 of the first two semesters but there I will be no condition for promoting a studentfrom C5 I third semester to fourth semester Z C However a student shall be promoted to Sfth s semester only if he has passedatleast 500Io lr ofthe flrst four semester I O8 d9There will be no condition for promoting a ClO studentfrom fiflh to sixth semester wavo 2 e9 However a student shall be promotedto Q seventhsemester only if he has passed a11the ofthe flrst two semesters 0 The student shall be promoted to eighth semester only if he has passedall the 4 of the flrst three semesters After a periodof eighthsemestersthe student shall be given a periodof two consecutive years more to passfailingwhich he shall have to start the course afreshfrom the first semester However such a Uma 2014.04.02 16: 08 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 83 6 Y4 J CWP No8583 of2009 8 studentwill not be required to quali61 the entrance test again 13 The aforesaidOrdinances carry on was further amendedby the Syndicate in its meeting held on 13122006 111 the followingmannerl Present Headin ProposedHeadingl C Carryon Systemfor various iii9 Cany on Systemfor various 0 semester examlnations law semester examinations Law 0 1and Engineeringand Technology Faculties and School of Social Faculties and School of Social Sciences I C5 Sciences Vide the amendment the carry on systemfor various Z semester examlnations was madeapplicableto the 5r w t and Faculties as well exceptLaw and School of Social Sciences However the amendmentwas appliedfrom Session 08 CLl 20072008 The Universityfurther introducedthe amendment in c1 mvm the cany systemof B Tech M Tech MCA and MBA S on Z tl years course vide its decision dated 1 82008 wherebythe cany on system was appliedin all the exceptLaw and Schoolof Social Sciencesfor which thereare separateOrdinances Vide the aforesaid decision the cany on system was made to the Computer Science c and Electronic Technologyby way of rther clariflcation of the amendment introducedvide Item No23 in the meetingof the held on 05122006 The are ofthe decision dated Ol082008 the amendedOrdinances Govemingthe cany Uma 2014.04.02 16: 08 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 84 Vd CWP No8583 of2009 9 on systemhas been appliedto all the coursesreferred to here4nabove As a consequence of the of carry Oll a studentcan be from flrst semester to second semester without any condition However such a studentcan be to third semester if he has passedat least 50 per cent 1 l of the First two semesters For promotion to 4th 0 semester no condition 1S Againfor promotion to 5 0 I semestera studentmust pass at least 50 per cent of t5 I the flrst four semesters Again for promotionfrom 5 to 6 4 Z semester 1Swithoutany condition For promotion to 7 semester a r m r further embargo1S created that the student must pass all Z ofthe flrst two semesters Similarlyfor 08 13 to 8 semesters a student must qualil all the ofthe r 3 flrst three thereby a student will not be 2 eligible to seek admission in 7 semester ifhe has any llll reappearor of flrst two semesters Same eligibilitycondition will applyfor promotionto 8 semester and if the student has a C reappear or backlog of flrst three semesters he is ineligible to seek admissionin 8 semester The grievance of the is that the amendment introducedor the clariflcation issuedvide order dated01 082008 1Sillegaland ln cases of the With a view to their contention reliance is placedon the Ordinance Uma 2014.04.02 16: 08 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 85 0 CWP No8583 of2009 10 dated 14 12000 Annexure Il9 which waS lIl force at the time of admission which onlyrequired 40 per cent aggregatemarksof all the papers in a semester of the fact whether a studentfails ln one or morepapers of that semesters It ilrther contended that cany on which was introduced 111 the m Calendar 1999 6Vol III has 110 to the 0 and Technology Faculties Law and School of Social 0 I Sciences as 1S evidentfrom Annexure P3 Even the amendment C5 introducedpursuantto the decision ofthe Syndicate vide Item 4 Z No23 lIl the held on 512006 carry on systemfor the m of and TechnologyFaculties has been L e Z from Session20072008 t is submittedthat j 10 Slnce the were admitted lIl the year 2005 this 2 amendmentis againnot to the havingbeen 2 made operative from Session 20072008 as perthe 2W contained in the amendmentOrdinances itself It 1S further that vide orderdatedOl082008 P4 herein the has beenapplied 1a which has affected the career of the petitioners Accordingto the learnedcounsel for the had the known that theywould be requiredto clear all the of flrst 213 semesters theywould have concentrated OIl those papers on Now alter two years the Uma 2014.04.02 16: 08 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 86 CWP No8583 of2009 11 cannot be punishedfor not havingcleared the papers two years back It 1S the case of the that the operation of the rules is when it takes away any of the rightof the hither to available ln existingstatutellaw Accordingto the the only 1 for promotion to the seven and eighthsemesters was 0 that a candidateshould secure 40 per cent marks in aggregate ln a C I semester of the fact whether a candidatehas failed 111 C9 I one or more ofthe papers ofthat semester Z In the replyflled by the the Universityhas relied upon the order dated Ol082008 whereby C I carry on systemhas been appliedto all the underaduate courses 08 lIl the UniversityexceptLaw and School of Social Sciences C r4 These two courses beinggovemedby separateOrdinances It is 2 Z reiteratedthat any having 111 C1e theflrst two semesters is ineligiblefor seekingadmission to 7 semesterand a candidatehavingreappear in flrst three semesters 1S to seekadmissionin 8 semester It is stated that asa 14e matter of fact order dated 01082008 is not an amendmento the regulation but onlyby wayof clarification as previous Ordinances of 2000 were in this regardand thus necessitateda clarification It is mentioned ln the replyflled by the University that some of the who had ln reappear Uma 2014.04.02 16: 08 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 87 14I CWPNo8583 of2009 12 examinations on flrst two semesters were to 7 semester subject to clearanceofthe backog ofthe flrst two semesters on theirfilingof the afdavit that in the event of the failure of the candidateto clear the reappear of flrst two the admission to 7 semester could be cancelled 1 CL Similar afdavits were flled by the who 0 securedadmission lll 8 semester while in flrst three CO I papers It is submittedthat all the admissionsto 7 and C5 I 8 semesters in respectto the candidateswho had baclog of flrst Z 213semesters were in nature and could be cancelledon m theirfailureto clear the tr When these petitions vvere flled interim orders were c6 by this Court in CWP No8583 of 2009 on 29052009 r Wme entryin 8 semester Similar orderswere passed in other 2 writ petitions the to seekadmissionin 7 and Il 8 semesters and also to appearin the examinationsfrom time to tlme MrDS Patwalialearned counsel for the has however arguedthat neither the Ordinances canyingon systemare in nature nor the orderdated Ol082008 can be construed to have His further contentionis that the Universityis entitled the rules even duringthe continuance of the Course by a to Uma 2014.04.02 16: 08 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 88 CWP No8583 of2009 13 studentas the Universitydoesnot hold a promiseto a studentnot to changethe duration or the manner or method of from one semesters to another exceptchangingthe syllabus or a course of studyfor which a studentmay be entitledto notice The have placedreliance upon a Single 1 t ofthis Court reportedPawan Kumar Sharma Vs 0 The State of Punjaband others 1991 639 Recent Services C3 I 407 ln this case the afflliatingUniversity C0 I byews the condition of passingthe Z examlnatlons ln a particularchance The students who are the course at the time of introductionof the byeaws 1Z Z assailed the action of the University the lssue a 06 learnedSingleBench ofthis Court held as followsl 13 It has been laid down in the above referred two V7 2 authoritiesthat the which are f3AW applicable at the time a studenttakes admission in the consolidatedcourse would keepon applying of any amendment till the student so admitted completesthe course In view of this the were not justifiedin applyingthe which were on 16 August 1986 to the studentswho had gotadmission in the BMS course in the flrst year priorto that date 95 Uma 2014.04.02 16: 08 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 89 1 C1 1 CWPNo8583 of2009 14 Reliance is also placedon another Division Bench judgmentof this Court in the case of Munish Kumar Talwar Vs The Vice Chancellor Baba Farid Universitvof Health Sciences and others 2007 62R 330 In this case also the rules for BAMS course were amended The amended rules 1 L admissionto final examinationif there 1SreappearlIl 0 the second examination The petitioner therein had 0 I in second thoughhe was granted admission C I to third semester but not to appear in the examinatlonSn Z This Court thequestionheld as under C 7 The short question that requires determination I IIl this case is whether the is to be c4 governed by the amended or uneamended r10 Ordinance The appellanthad been pemittedto a7 Z ln appear in the 3 ProfessionaI examinationheld tl AprilMay2005 Ifthe originaldurationofthe 3 Professionalhad not been amended the had cleared thereappearsof the 2 Professional and on that account there was no before him to appear in the Onal examination which was then to be held in November December 2005 As per the appellanthe is Suffering on account of the wrong application of the amendedOrdinancein his case Uma 2014.04.02 16: 08 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 90 V 4 CWP No8583 of2009 15 9 Since the to be treatedas belongingto batch of year 2000 as already noticed theprovisionofpara11 above would also come to his rescue When the the course he was entitledto take position that he would be eligibleto clear lst and C 2 Professional by November4Oecember 2005 0 He reallycould not have any say ln fixingthe C0 I durationof the 3 by amendmentin C5 the Ordinance alter he had joinedthe course To I remedy such a situationonlyperhaps theprovision Z of para 11 of Ordinance speciflcallyprovided that A i candidatesadmittedpriorto 2001 will appear in I final after two years of study It can 6l5 C be noticed that the appellant has studied wlth the 7 batch in 1 and 2 Professional examinations Z Thus a different duration of the course if being 0 applied to similarlysituated candidates We do not say that it amounts to discriminationbut parity needto be maintained between similarlysituated C candidatesand that is what is soughtto be achievedby Ordinance above We are thusofthe view that unamendedOrdinance would govem the case of theappellant and theprovisions of the amended Ordinance cannot be made applicable to him 93 Uma 2014.04.02 16: 08 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 91 14 CWPNo583of2009 16 To the contrary Mr DS Patwalia leamed counsel for the has relied upon PunjabUniversitv Vs SubashChander and another 3 Supreme Court Cases 603 In this case the had securedadmissionto MBBS course ln the year 1965 The existing required 1 mnumum of 50 per cent marksto passin each subjectIn addition 0 to the above there was a rule for grantof grace marks C I uptoone of the total aggregate marksincludingmarksfor C I Practicaland internalassessmentif a candidatefails ln one or more Z In theyear 1970 an amendment was madein the m rules and the award of grace marks was conflned to total r Z marks excludingthe marks for intemal assessment c6 Where a candidatefails ln one or more providedhe has CQ a7 in a11 where a separate of passing Z also exists In case of BAMSIBDS examination the Ll gracemarks of one percentwas conflnedto each subjectand not to of all subjectsThe petitioner who was a student of IVlBBS was failingln one He claimed grace marks on the basisof unmamendedrules but he was awardedgrace marks on the n 6 ee nt 4 10i2 1 basisof the amendedrules whichrdidhotlve beneflcialto him r or 1 12 thePuab andHalyanaHigh Court A t He the same ln r11 Il 1 7 lt FullBench ofthlisCouit allowedthe 1 L 4 I rules prevalent atthe 1 1411 r 11 lle Uma 2014.04.02 16: 08 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 92 b CWP No8583 of2009 17 applyand the amended rules cannot be applied to thedetrimentofthe candidates Honble theSupreme Court while the 1SSue held as under 1 1 We do not agree with the leamedJudgesofthe Full Bench ofthe HighCourt that thereis any elementof e retrospectivity111 the changebroughtabout by the tZ addition ofthe exception to Rule 2l ofthe Calendar for 0 Cao the year 1970 according to the Shorter C Oxford EnglishDictionaryThird Edition in relation to I Statutesetc means Operative with regardto pasttime Z The changebroughtabout by the addition of the exceptionto Rule 2 l does not say that it shall be tr operativewith effect from any earlier date It is 08 obviously It is not possible to hold that lt 1S CQ retrospectlvelrl operationmerelybecause though S2 Z introducedlIl 1970 it was appliedto Subash Chander m 1 Who appeared for the final examination ln 1974 after he hadjoinedthe course earlier in 1965 No promisewas made or could be deemed to have been made to him at the time of his admission in 1965 that ee there will be no alteration of the rule or regulation 111 regardto the percentageof marks requiredfor passing any examination or award of grace marks and that the rules relatingthereto which were in force at the time of his admission would continue to be appliedto him until he flnished his whole course 53 Uma 2014.04.02 16: 08 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 93 4 CWPNo8583 of2009 18 12 Therefore we are clearlyofthe opinion that there1S no of the changein the rule made in the year 1970having merelybecause lt was in 1974to SubashChanderwho hadjoined the MBBS course in 1965when the rule award of grace marks was different In these circumstances 1 we affirm theview of DK Mahajanand PC Jain JJ 0 in the Division Bench judgment in SewaRam 0 I Ve Kurukshetra and disapprove the view taken C5 by the learned Judgesof the Full Bench in the decision I under in this case and hold that the University Z rightin holdingthat SubashChander 1 was t was not entitled to 16grace marksunder the old rule I but was entitledto only4 gracemarks under the new rule 08 r and had therefore not passedthe examination in t raso We allow the appealbut withoutany order Z Howeverthis decisionwill not affect the as to costs CL resultof the examination of Subash Chander in if it had been declaredas per the directionof the learnedJudgesofthe Full Benchin the LettersPatent Cn Appeal The aforesaid was followed byanotherBench of the Court in the case of Puniab Universitv ChandigarhVs Deviani Chakrabartiandothers 3 Supreme Court Cases 612wherein it has been held as followsl Uma 2014.04.02 16: 08 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 94 1 l d CWPNo8583 of2009 19 In the presentcase also the new decisions are pnma facie in operation and theydid not become merelybecause they applied to studentswho had already started their educational careers We therefore allow these appealsbut without anyorder as to j C costs and set aside the of the High 0 c0 Court and dismiss the writ petitionsHowever this decision will not affect the rightwhich might C9 have been grantedto the petitioners in the wnt Z petitions on the basis ofthe High Court which havebeen reversedin theseappeals 0 A similar lssue came to be considered by a Division Z 08 Bench of this Court lIl the case of Rahul Gupta Vs State of tyo 4t Harvana2000 049SCT 1099 wherein SubhashChanders case 3 Z supra9hasbeenrelied uponand it hasbeenheld as under m 4 We have heard learned counsel for the parties and are of the view that there is no merit in the writ petitionsThe onlyargumentadvancedbythe counsel for the petitioner is that when his client joinedthe diplomacourse ln the year 1997 the made it clear that the duration of that course was 3 yearsand the could not changethe duration till the students who joined the course in the academic session 199798 had Uma 2014.04.02 16: 08 Scanned True Copy of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 10:57 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 95 7 CWPN08583 of2009 20 completedthe same He has placedreliance on Full Bench of this Court in Amardeep SinghSahotav StateofPuniab etc 199ll SLR 673 1993 41 SCT 328 PS Hl FBl and SwaraniitSinghand anotherv StateofPuniab and others 1998 21SLR 1411997 41SCT 511 m Q Hl FB We are unable to agree with the 0 contentlOll of the petitionerFrom the standtaken 0 I by the it 1S clear that the competent C authoritydecided in the year 1995 to revise the I curriculum of Electronics and Communication Z DiplomaCourse to 3112 years consistingof 7 m tr 4 semesters The 7 semester includes the training and the marks awarded to a candidatein 08 10 this traininghave to be included in the diploma t 17 awarded to him It 1S irther clear that the 2 Director Technical Education Haryanaby his fl communicationdated 1810995 informed all the Principals ofthe Institutesin the StateofHaryana which impartsuch education that the duration of the course had been increased to 32