SCA/24/2006 1/3 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 24 of 2006 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? ========================================================= DILIP R CHAVDA & 12 - Petitioner(s) Versus GUJARAT UNIVERSITY & 2 - Respondent(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MR DM THAKKAR for Petitioner(s) : 1 - 13. MRS VD NANAVATI for Respondent(s) : 1, MR JV JAPEE for Respondent(s) : 2, MS KJ BRAHMBHATT for Respondent(s) : 3, ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI Date : 19/06/2006 ORAL JUDGMENT 1. The petitioners who had to appear for First year B. Pharm examination though answered theory papers did not appear in the practical SCA/24/2006 2/3 JUDGMENT examination conducted by the University. According to the petitioners this was so because the petitioners were never communicated about the date of the practical examination nor any sufficient publicity made. Be that as it may, subsequently in April-May 2006, all the petitioners have appeared again in the theory examination as stated by learned advocate Shri Thakker for the petitioners. According to his instructions, practical examinations are not yet over but that petitioners will appear in such practical tests also. 2. In view of the above development, nothing further is required to be done in this petition. Surely the University will grant further enrollment to the petitioners depending on the outcome of the examination. It will be open for the petitioners to make representations in the University in case of difficulty. 3. In view of the above discussion, the petition is disposed of. Rule is discharged with no order as to costs. (Akil Kureshi,J.) SCA/24/2006 3/3 JUDGMENT (raghu)