^ HI6H COURT OF CHHATTCSSARH AT BIb^SPUR WRFT PETCTION (O N0.3000/2008 (Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India) Rungto College of Scienceand Technology- Through its authorized officer ©urpritSin9h Ohillon, S/o Late Shri 5yan Singh bhillon, Aged Aout 33 years, Lecturer, Rungta College of Science and Technolo9y, 6.E. Road, eanjpara, Durg (C.©.), R/o C/o bhilton Nursing Home, Stotion Rocd, Durg (C.G) Vs. RESPONOBCTS 1. Pt. Rwishankar Shukla yniversity, Raipur through its Registrar, Pt. Ravishanka' Shukla University, Rdpur (€.©.). 2. State of Chhattisgarh -through the Secretnry, Department of School Education, &.K.S. Bhawon, Roipur (C.©.) ^ Mr. P. Diwakar, 5r. Advocate with Mr. Adil Minhaj, Adv. for the petitioner. Mr. N.K. Agarwal, Deputy Advocate Seneral for respondent No.2. ORAL ORDER ffassed on 18.6.2008) Per Dhirendra Mishra. J: 1. Heard on admission. 2. The petitioner by this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has prayed for following reliefs;- "10.1. That, this Honble Court may kindly be pieased to set dside/quash the conditions imposed in the revised time tabte dated 5.6.2008 of Annual Examination 2008 of B.Ed. Course, so far as it debars the students from other States belonging to the 5C/5T/OBC category from appearing in the examination. 10.2 That, this Hon'bie Court may kindly be pleased to direct the University to issue fresh time table fro the Annual Examination 2006 of B.Ed. Course, permitting the students from outside the State beionging to the 5C/ST/OBC category to asppew in the examinotion. 10.3 Any other relief (s) may aiso be given to the petitioner, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case." ; '^ ^5? /.'' 3. Srievance of the petitioner is that this Court vide order dated 2S.3.20W passed 'm W.P. (c) No.6720/07 and other cormected writ petitions had allowed writ petitions and directed the re^sondent University to enrolt the petitioners as the s+udents of B.Ed. course in their respective colleges affiliated to it and issue them eligibilit/ cert-ificate for appearing in the examination. However, the re^)ondent university in utter disregard to -Hie aforesaid order has issued the revised time table (Annexure P-5) for B.Ed. Examination 2008 with a tip that the students of B.Ed. course whose admissions are not as per Ordinonce of University and constitutional provisions and iriiose matter is pending before the Division Bench of the High Court at Bilaspur, their examination will be separately conducted, if required, as per directions in the finat judgment of •Hie Court". The above conduct of the respondent university is detiberate and willful attiempt to disobey +he directions of this Hon'bte Court and the same is apparent discrimination against the carrier of the students who are not permitted to appear in •the findl examination. In these circumstances the condition imposed in the revised time table of anhual examination of 2008 be stayed and students be allowed to appear in the anniial examination, which has atready been commenced from 17.6.2008. <? 4. I have heard leamed counsel for the petitioner. I have perused the docunient of Annexure P-5 being revised time table for B.Ed. Course 2006 as also the order of Annexure P-3 passed by this Court. 5. From bare perusal of the order of Annexure P-3 it is evident that respondent No.l vide memo dated 14.9.2007 addressed to -the Director, 5.C.E.R.T. had declined to issue eligibility cert-ificate to such students who belong to SC, 5T & OBC category, who are not the domicile in the State of C.G. and wriio have not obtained 50% in the graduation level. The Director, S.C.E.R.T. vide his communication dated 22.10.2007 had directed the Principals of atl the colleges that admission of such students be ccncelled after refunding them the admisston fee on account of refusal by the university to issue them eligibilit/ certificate. 6. This Court Vide order of Annexure P-3 had quashed both the above orders and directed •the university to enroll the petitioners as students -I '<? % <,? of B.Ed. course in their respective colleges affiliated to it ond issue them eligibility certificate for appearing in the examination. 7. Since the relief ckiimed by the petitioner in the instaint petitton has already been granted by this Court' to the petittoner college against the respondent university in W.P. (c) No.6720/07, fresh writ petition for the same relief by the same petitioner cgainst the respondent university on the ground that the respondent university is not obeying •Hie orders passed by this Court is not maintainable. However, the petitioner is at tiberty to avail the remedies wailable under the taw for the acts of the respondent university in this regard. 8. The petition is accordingly dismissedas not maintamable. 9. Consequently, I.A. No.l, apptication for grant of interim also stand dismissed. ^-tt_- Sd/- Dhirendra Mishra Judge Roshan/-