CWP No.8957 of 2011 #1# IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.8957 of 2011 Date of Order: 20.5.2011 Navdeep .....Petitioner Vs. Dean Bandhu Chhotu Ram University and others .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH Present: Mr. R.S. Malik, Advocate for the petitioner. JASWANT SINGH, J (ORAL) Petitioner, who claims himself to be a student of MBA (Information Technology & Management) in Dean Bandhu Chhotu Ram University of Science and Technology, Murthal, Sonepat-respondent No.1 has filed the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution for directing the respondents to issue him roll number and permit to appear in the examination of Second Semester for the aforesaid course by granting relaxation in attendance. It is the case of the petitioner that he has cleared first semester but now respondent No.3 has withheld his roll number for the second semester due to the shortage of attendance. The only ground urged by the petitioner is that roll number has been issued to other similarly situated students by giving relaxation whereas the petitioner has been discriminated while not being permitted to appear in the second semester. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner, this court does not find any merit in the present petition and the same deserves dismissal. CWP No.8957 of 2011 #2# Admittedly, two papers of second semester have already been over before the filing of the present petition and, therefore, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed only on this ground. So far as the contention that the relaxation of attendance has already been granted to other similarly situated students as depicted in para 5 of the writ petition is also not helpful to the petitioner. Admittedly, the aggregate percentage of attendance of the petitioner for the second semester is only 13.74% and the students against whom he is seeking parity, are having the attendance far more than the petitioner, which is clear from the averments as depicted in para 5 of the writ petition and the same reads as under: “Sandeep Raj Duggal : 54.5% Sunny Jhamb : 32% Prashant : 42% Sunny Dahiya : 35% Navdeep (Petitioner) : 13.74%” Keeping in view the facts and circumstances discussed hereinabove, no case is made out to issue a writ of mandamus while exercising extra ordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution. Dismissed. May 20, 2011 ( JASWANT SINGH ) manoj JUDGE