C.W.P. No.17667 of 2010 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.W.P. No.17667 of 2010 DATE OF DECISION : 11.5.2011 Sandeep Kumar PETITIONER VERSUS Kurkshetra University, Kurukshetra & another RESPONDENTS CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER Present:- Shri Aman Pal, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri A.S.Virk, Advocate for respondent No.1. MAHESH GROVER, J. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the only limited prayer he makes in the instant petition is that he be granted the necessary relief as has been granted to similarly situated persons who had approached this Court by way of C.W.P. No.7161 of 2010 decided on 18.11.2010. The petitioner had been granted admission to LL.B. 3 year course by the respondent/College. The Kurukshetra University intimated the College that admission was contrary to the rules and therefore, should not be regularized. The petitioner was permitted to continue and in the second year he was intimated that his candidature has been cancelled. C.W.P. No.17667 of 2010 -2- This Court while dealing with similar controversy, observed as follows :- “At the same time, it cannot be ignored that the college has in a way spoiled two years life of the petitioner. If the college had been vigilant enough to check the eligibility of the petitioner and had not admitted the petitioner, he may have been able to pursue his career elsewhere. The result is that the petitioner has lost three valuable years of his life. This reason alone of course would not be enough to ignore this illegality and to permit the petitioner to continue this study, though he was not eligible to get admission into the LL.B. Course. Since the petitioner had not made any mis-representation and prima facie it is the college which apparently for some petty gains appears to have admitted the petitioner in the LL.B. Course that this situation has resulted. Thus, a good case is made out for directing the college to compensate the petitioner for spoiling life and career certainly. The college accordingly is not only required to refund the entire tuition fees charged from the petitioner for all these years, but in addition would also compensate the petitioner at the rate of Rs.50,000/- per year for total period of three years for retarding the life and career of the petitioner by this much time. Thus, the college would pay in addition to a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- by way of compensation/damage for the harm that the college has caused to the life of the petitioner. Besides, the petitioner would be at liberty to seek further damages if he thinks that harm and loss cause to his life and C.W.P. No.17667 of 2010 -3- career is more than what is assessed above by approaching the appropriate forum, which shall while awarding compensation/damage keep in mind the amount as awarded by this Court while assessing the damages to the petitioner, if any, found due. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of in the above terms.” If the facts of the instant petition have to be seen, they are para- materia to the ones which pertain to the petitioner in C.W.P. No.7161 of 2010. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of in the same terms and the petitioner is held entitled to the refund and also the compensation, as has been determined in the said writ petition. (MAHESH GROVER) May 11, 2011 JUDGE GD WHETHER TO BE REFERRED TO REPORTER? YES/NO