Civil writ Petition No.17993 of 2009 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil writ Petition No.17993 of 2009 Decided on : 27.7.2010 Lalit Goyat .... Petitioner VERSUS Panjab University & another .... Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH. Present: None for the petitioner. Mr. Ashish Rawal, Advocate, for Mr. Anupam Gupta, Advocate, for the respondents. RANJIT SINGH, J. The petitioner, who is the student of three years LL.B. course, has filed this petition for issuance of mandamus or writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the action of the respondent/University in not issuing roll No. to him for enabling him to sit in the examination of 5th semester of LL.B. course. The petitioner got admission in three years LL.B. course in the year 2007. Presently, he is a student of 5th semester. The petitioner pleads that he was admitted in the Post Graduate Institute, Chandigarh and was operated on 22.7.2009 and remained in the hospital upto 27.7.2009. However, the petitioner Civil writ Petition No.17993 of 2009 -2- had not disclosed for what he had undergone this operation. It is further pleaded that because of his hospitalization and the operation, he could not attend the classes and accordingly, he ran short of lectures. Accordingly, the petitioner was not being permitted to appear in the examination of 5th semester as he was not eligible. The petitioner claims to have made the representation along with medical certificate for condonation of the lectures. Having remained unsuccessful, the petitioner filed the present writ petition seeking direction as prayed for. By way of an interim measure, the petitioner was permitted to participate in the examination commencing on 26.11.2009 provisionally. It was specifically noted that the permission as was granted would not create any right or equity in favour of the petitioner. The Court had further directed that the result of the petitioner would not be declared without the leave of the Court. Thereafter, the case was adjourned on different dates, but none came present on behalf of the petitioner. Lastly, the case was adjourned on 20.4.2010 for today as none was present on the said date. Today, also nobody has come present to represent the petitioner. Reply on behalf of the University is filed. In reply, it is disclosed that the petitioner was having shortage of 52 lectures and not only 2 lectures as conveyed by him. As per the Rules, the petitioner is required to attend 75% of the lectures. This is a mandatory requirement. Reference is made to Regulation 3 of the Panjab University Calendar, as per which a deficiency of lectures Civil writ Petition No.17993 of 2009 -3- may be condoned by the Chairperson being Head of the Department, but only upto 30 lectures in various papers and upto 8 lectures in the law moots, tutorials. Reference is made to para 33 (6) of the Minutes of the Meeting of the Syndicate, as per which the Vice Chancellor, on the recommendation of the Board of control, has been authorized to condone shortage of 10 lectures, over and above the powers vested on the Head of the Department. Syndicate is given further power to relax upto 10 lectures. Even if the authorities exercised their maximum available power, the petitioner still will fall short of lectures. It may not be possible for this Court to condone 52 lectures by which the petitioner is falling short. No provision has been pointed out or brought to my notice, where lectures over and above 50 could be condoned, even in those cases, where one had remained sick or had undergone an operation. No cause for interference is made out. The present writ petition is dismissed. July 27, 2010 ( RANJIT SINGH ) monika JUDGE