IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.876 of 2011 1.Sujit Kumar @ Sujeet Kumar S/O Shri Bhubneshwar Yadav, R/O C/O Sitaram Yadav, Ex-M.P., Harnichak, Post- Anishabad, P.S. Phulwarisharif, District- Patna 2.Laxmi Kumari D/O Shri Naresh Mishra, R/O C/O A.K.Jha, Flat No.206, Shivanil Apartment, Kasturba Path, North S.K.Puri, Patna-13 3.Madhabi Sionha, D/O Dr.Rati Kant Prasad, R/O Matriohbaya, Road No.14, Ashok Nagar, Patna-20 4.Samvedna Snehi, D/O Vinay Krishna, resident of Vaidehi Niwas, Chankya Coloney, Paswan Chowk, Hajipur, District- Vaishali ………….. Petitioners Versus 1.Vice Chanellor, Patna University, Patna 2.Registrar, Patna University, District- Patna 3.Principal, Patna Training College, Patna 4.Principal, Women‟s Training College, Patna ……….. Respondents ----------- For the Petitioners : M/s Vinod Kumar, Harendra Kumar and Nityanand Niraj, Adv. ----------- 3. 05/04/2011 Petitioners have filed this writ application for a direction to the authorities of the Patna University to take their admission in Patna Training College and Women‟s Training College for the Session 2010-11 on the basis of marks/rank secured by them in the entrance examination conducted by the University in the year 2010. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that as per prospectus 80% seats were reserved in these Institutions for Graduates and Post-Graduates of Patna University. Petitioners were not Graduate from Patna 2 University, but they were Post-Graduate from this University. As such, they applied for their admission under 80% quota of seats. Petitioners appeared in the entrance test, qualified and were included in the merit list. Accordingly, petitioners went to the Institutions for their admission. However, the same was denied to them on the ground that they were not Graduate from Patna University. In the circumstances, petitioners filed this writ application. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that as per Hindi version of the prospectus, 80% seats were reserved for the candidates holding degrees of Graduation or Post Graduation from Patna University. Therefore, if a candidate was either Graduate or Post Graduate from Patna University, he should have been considered for admission under that quota. Since, petitioners were Post Graduates from Patna University, they were also entitled for admission against the said 80% quota. He also submits that once a declaration is made in the prospectus, the same was binding on the University and no further change in the prospectus could be introduced during admission 3 process. In this connection, learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon a judgment of a Bench of this Court in the case of Akshat Chaitanya Vs. Chanakya National Law University, reported in 2009(3) PLJR 155, and has particularly relied upon observations of the Court made in paragraphs 9, 10, 18 and 27. For convenience, observations of the Court made in the aforesaid paragraphs are being reproduced herein below : “9. The single question for consideration is what was the original qualification prescribed in the prospectus? Did the petitioner fulfill it? If he fulfilled it and was allowed to appear at All India Competitive Examination and displayed his merits irrespective of his standing in the Higher Secondary Examination, can he be denied the right to admission on any subsequent conciliations not originally laid down, sought to be invoked by the University. 10. The original prospectus required a candidate to have 45% aggregate marks in the Higher Secondary Examination. The petitioner admittedly fulfills it. He appeared at the All India Competitive Examination and passed. He has been placed in all India rank at 1771 and at serial 15 in the State of Bihar in general category. The admission is to be governed by the conditions laid down in the prospectus. Once the Respondents permitted him to appear at the entrance examination, being satisfied of his eligibility and he has passed, the respondents cannot be permitted to impose some other qualification of eligibility which 4 was not there originally by indicating it in the counselling letter. 18. The contention of University that the eligibility to appear at the entrance examination was confined only to those who cleared the Higher Secondary Examination with 45% marks in one go and not through the compartment, is not borne from the prospectus and cannot be subsequently incorporated. The Court, therefore, rejects this objection of the University. 27. The petitioner has been wronged for no fault of his. The Court has arrived at the conclusion that the respondents have erred. The petitioner cannot be asked to bear the burden of this error. At stake is his life and careers. For the respondents he is just another faceless student.” A counter affidavit has been filed by the respondents in the case. Learned counsel for the University submits that for admission in B.Ed Course in the Institutions concerned for the Session 2010-11, an ordinance was framed by the Senate of the University which was approved by the Syndicate and thereafter it was sent to the Chancellor for approval. He submits that since the Ordinance had been submitted to the Chancellor for approval, it was clearly mentioned in the prospectus itself that admission process shall be as per the provisions of the Ordinance. The relevant portion of the Prospectus in Hindi as well as 5 in English are reproduced herein below : **;g izos'k izfØ;k iVuk fo'ofo|ky; ds ch0,M0 lEcU/kh ml v/;kns'k ds izko/kkuksa ds vUrxZr gksxhA** “The admission process will being soon after the declaration of BEET result as per the provisions of the Ordinance for Admission to Bachelor Course of Education (B.Ed.), Patna University.” He submits that the Ordinance was finally approved by the Chancellor and a copy of the same has been produced as Annexure-A with the counter affidavit. He points out that while approving the said Ordinance, in terms of section 39(2) of the Patna University Act, the words “and Post Graduate” were deleted by the Chancellor. Hence, 80% seats stood reserved only for Graduates of Patna University and not for Post Graduate students of the University. The law laid down by this Court in the case of Akshat Chaitanya (Supra) is the normal rule. Admission in any Institution pursuant to an advertisement has to be governed in terms of the prospectus issued or advertisement published for the purpose. No subsequent changes can be introduced in the same by any authority to the disadvantage of any candidate, 6 which law has been correctly laid down by this Court in the aforesaid judgment. However, facts of this case are slightly different. The prospectus itself made it clear that admission process shall be as per the provisions of the Ordinance. The Ordinance itself became a law after its final approval by the Chancellor. The admission process was started during the pendency of approval of the Ordinance. The Ordinance which has finally been approved by the Chancellor has been amended slightly by deleting the words „and Post Graduate‟ from the Ordinance. Thus, the candidates having only Post Graduation Degree from Patna University, without Graduation Degree from the University, are not entitled for consideration of their cases against 80% quota of seats reserved for Patna University Graduates. Therefore, this Court does not find any merit in the claim of the petitioners that being Post Graduates from Patna University they are entitled for consideration under that quota. However, this does not debar the petitioners from consideration of their cases under general quota of 20% seats open for all eligible applicants or against any left over seats under 7 80% quota which the University may decide to fill from general category candidates, if the petitioners otherwise qualify and come under the zone of consideration for admission under open category. The University shall take final decision in respect of eligibility of the petitioners in the general category positively within two weeks from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. In the circumstances, the writ application is disposed of with the above observations and directions. Pradeep/ ( J. N. Singh,J.)