'** ^^ ^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRFT PETmON (CVi No. 4513 of2009 PETITIONER : Vivek Pandey S/o Shri Umaniwas Pmdey, aged about 29 years, R/o Bhoramdev Sugar Factory, District Kawardha Kabirdham (C.G.) VERSUS RESPONDENTS : 1. Gum Ghasidas Central University, through the Registrar, Koni, Tahsil and District, Bilaspur (C.G.) 2. The Director, Institute of Distance Education, Gum Ghasidas Central University, Kon^ Tahsil and District Bilaspur (C.G.) ' 3. The Chief Goordmator, Institute of Distance Education, Gum Ghasidas Central Umversity- Koni, Tahsil & District Bilaspur (C.G.) WRIT PETmON LTNDER ARTICLE 226 OF CONSTrTLTION OF INDIA SB: Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Agmhotri, J. Present: ShriSameer Behar, Advocate forthe petitioner. ORDERCORAL) (Passed on 20th day of August, 2009) 1. Challenge in this petition is to the letter dated28th July, 2009 (Amiexure P/l) passed by the respondent No.3, whereby the petitioner has not been permitted to appear in the examination on the ^ound that thepetitioner has not attended 75 percent classes ofthe course and as such^ hebecame disentitled to appear inthe examination. 2. Leamed counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that there is no mention in the syllabus requirmg attendance of a candidate for 75 percent as pre-condition to appear m the examination. Secondly, the petitioner has completed his assignmentand the department has also ^?^ :^ accq?ted it. Thus, it cannot be saidthatthe petitioner has not attended 75 percent ofthe total classes. Furthen the petitioner fell ill on the ground of heavy work, therefore, the mandatory condition of 75 percent attendance is not applicable. Be that as it may, it is an admitted case ofthe petitioner that he has attended onlythree days out of 15 days contact classes. The petitioner fell ill is not evident from the medical certificate as no specific reason has been given for remaimng absent from attending the classes. Secondly, the petitioner was well aware about the requirement of 75 percent attendance as is clear from the notice dated 24A April, 2009 (Annexure P/5). Thus, the reasons that he was not aware of the requirement of 75 percent attendance is not sustainable and deserves to be rejected. Having regard to the facts ofthe case wherein the petitioner has not attended mandatory requirement of75 percent ofthe total classes, I do not find any merit in this case. Tliis is for the educational mstitution to maintam fhe educational standards by procuring attendance in classes also. For the reasons stated hereinabove, the petition is dismissed. sd/- .. _: SatishK.AgniNtt1 Judge Ajriit