1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR :: J U D G M E N T :: D.B. CIVIL SPECIAL APPEAL(W)NO.41/2007 University of Rajasthan, Jaipur Vs. Suresh Singhal & Anr. Date of Judgment :: 23-07-2007 HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SHRI J.M. PANCHAL HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE BHANWAROO KHAN Mr. Tarun Joshi, for the appellant. PER HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE J.M. PANCHAL: By filing the instant appeal under Section 18 of the Rajasthan High Court Ordinance 1949, the appellant has challenged that part of the judgment dated February 15, 2005 rendered by the learned Single Judge in SBCWP no.3070/04 by which the appellant is saddled with cost of Rs.10,000/- while allowing the petition filed by respondent no.1. After completing B.SC. final examination, the respondent no.1 applied for admission in B.D.S. course which was to begin from the academic term 2002. While seeking admission to the said course, 2 the respondent no.1 forwarded original certificates to the appellants for his enrollment. However, the original certificates were returned by the appellant on the ground that the respondent no.1 had not secured 50% marks in Physics, Chemistry and Biology. By letter dated May 24, 2004, the respondent no.2 college informed the appellant-University that the respondent no.1 had secured 56% marks and was eligible to be enrolled for B.D.S. course. In spite of letter having been received by the respondent no.2 college, the appellant-University did not take any action in the matter at all. Apprehending that he would not be permitted to appear in the forthcoming examination, the respondent no.1 approached the Court by filing the above numbered petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. The petition was placed for preliminary hearing before the learned Single Judge on July 29, 2004 and after hearing the learned counsel for the respondent no.1, notices were ordered to be issued to the respondents including the appellant- University. The Court found merits in the case and therefore, by order dated July 29, 2004 directed the appellant-University to provisionally enroll the respondent no.1 and allow him to appear in the ensuing examination. It was also observed by the Court that provisional enrollment or permission to appear in the examination would be subject to the 3 order to be passed in the writ petition. The appellant-University was also directed not to declare the result of the respondent no.1 without prior permission of the Court. The matter was again listed for further hearing on January 28, 2005 and in spite of due service of notice, nobody appeared on behalf of the appellant-University, as a result of which, the Court had to direct the Registrar of the University to remain present in the Court. The record further shows that no reply to the writ petition was filed by the appellant in spite of direction dated January 28, 2005 and though on February 10, 2005, the Registrar, University of Rajasthan remained present before the Court no reply was filed on that day. During the course of hearing of the petition, it was found by the learned Single Judge that the respondent no.1 was already admitted as eligible candidate, and therefore a direction was given to the appellant-University to finally enroll him if he was given only provisional enrollment number. In view of this reprehensible conduct of the University, the learned Single Judge while allowing the petition has imposed cost of Rs.10,000/- which is subject matter of challenge in the instant appeal. 4 Having regard to the conduct of the appellant-University, this Court finds that imposition of cost cannot be termed as arbitrary so as to warrant interference of this Court in the instant appeal. The appeal which lacks merits, deserves to be dismissed summarily. For the foregoing reasons, the appeal fails and is summarily dismissed. [BHANWAROO KHAN ],J. [J.M.PANCHAL],ACTG.CJ. Praveen