- 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR O R D E R Suman Kathuria vs. State of Raj.& Ors. S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.1008/2007 DATE OF ORDER : 5th March, 2008 P R E S E N T HON'BLE JUSTICE SHRI GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS Mr.S.K.M.Vyas,for the petitioner. Mr.K.R.Saharan, for the respondent University. BY THE COURT: In this case, the petitioner is seeking direction to respondents no.2 and 3 to declare her result of Ph.D.Executive in Doctorate in Business Administration. The case of the petitioner is that she was admitted to the course of Ph.D.Executive in Doctorate in Business Administration by the respondent no.2 through its duly authorised study centre-respondent no.4. The petitioner after completing the course submitted her thesis which was sent to the respondent no.2 for evaluation and declaration of result. According to the petitioner, the institution from where she was pursuing her studies sent so many communications - 2 - for declaring her result but her result was not declared. On 17/7/2006, the institution from where the petitioner was pursuing her studies, sent a communication in that also it was specifically mentioned that the result of one student is still awaited, though the internal and external marks have already been sent. It was also mentioned in the said communication that project report of the petitioner was also forwarded on 17/4/2006. Along with the marks of the petitioner request was again made to declare the result of the petitioner. For the purpose of declaring result, letters dated 11/9/2006 & 3/10/2006 were also written by the Institution and petitioner also submitted a representation dated 17/7/2006 but her result was not declared and at last communication dated 30/11/2006 was received by the petitioner from the Registrar of the University in which petitioner was required to furnish the following documents: “(i) Five sets of thesis to reach University office within 20 days from the date of issue of - 3 - this letter. (ii) The Bio-Data of the concerned Supervisor of your Thesis and his consent/certificate to submit the Thesis with the University.” During the pendency of the writ petition, while filing reply, a communication dated 3/11/2007 has been filed before this Court in which it is stated that the thesis for award of EDBA degree was communicated to a set of examiners for individual evaluation and both the examiners have submitted their report giving identical recommendation, separately, together with detailed observations, which reads as under: “The candidate has not gone through the subject and no clearly explained any aspect of the study. Hence, I find this work unsatisfactory, incompetent, not informative, not extensive and no interpretative from any point of view. Therefore, I recommend to reject this dissertation.” Learned counsel for the respondent vehemently argued that the result of the petitioner was not declared due to certain defects in the thesis, which is evident from communication - 4 - dated 30/11/2006, so also the petitioner has not furnished the required documents. It is further submitted that the respondents were always ready to declare the result on fulfilling the requisite conditions but in absence of required documents, declaration of result was not possible. Therefore, the University cannot be blamed for the delay in declaring the result. Further, the thesis of the petitioner was rejected by the two examiners. I have perused the entire record of the case and gone through the pleadings of both the sides. As per the respondents, there was deficiency in submitting the project report. Therefore, petitioner was under obligation to comply with the directions issued by the University for furnishing the required documents as desired by the University in Annex.21. According to the respondents, the required documents have still not submitted by the petitioner before the University and without these documents, the evaluation of thesis was done and rejected by the University as communicated vide letter dated 3/11/2007. - 5 - In these facts and circumstances, in the interest of justice, one more opportunity is granted to the petitioner to furnish all the required documents to the University and the University should again evaluate the thesis of the petitioner for the purpose of declaring the result of petitioner. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the University to evaluate the thesis submitted by the petitioner afresh upon furnishing the required documents by the petitioner. The petitioner shall furnish the required documents before the University within a period of 20 days from today. After evaluation of the thesis, the final decision for declaration of result shall be taken by the University within two months ignoring the earlier rejection letter dated 3/11/2007. (GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS), J. Pankaj Baweja