IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No. 2324 of 2008 Date of decision: 30.09.2010 Anureet Kaur ...Petitioner Versus Panjab University, Chandigarh and another ...Respondents Present: Mr. Rajinder Goyal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Ashish Rawal, Advocate for the respondents. RANJIT SINGH J. Having completed her B.Sc. (IT) from Guru Nanak Dev University securing 76% marks, the petitioner took admission in MCA after qualifying in the entrance examination. In the year 2002, she cleared her first semester of MCA getting 76.85% marks. The petitioner got married and shifted to Canada. Because of this, she had to discontinue her studies. The University celebrated its Diamond Jubilee year in 2007 and as a goodwill gesture decided to grant special chance to the students of professional and non-professional courses to complete their courses left incomplete. The petitioner had come back to India during November 2007 and submitted a representation to the respondent-University for condoning the intervening gap period and permitting her to get admission in MCA 2nd semester during academic session 2007-08, for the purpose of enabling her to complete the course. The matter was referred to Syndicate for considering the request. In its meeting held on 08.01.2008, Syndicate allowed the request of the petitioner. This was intimated to the petitioner. The petitioner then duly deposited the tuition fee. Civil Writ Petition No. 2324 of 2008 -2- Suddenly on 04.02.2008 the petitioner was informed that, as per the orders passed by the Vice Chancellor, her re-admission was to be kept in abeyance till further orders. She received another letter on 18.02.2008 informing that admission granted to her stood cancelled. The petitioner, accordingly, filed this writ petition. Under the interim order passed by this Court, the petitioner has completed study of the course and has appeared in the examination also. The detailed marks card has also been issued to the petitioner. Considering the facts and background of this case, counsel appearing for the University was required to have instructions, if the admission of the petitioner could be regularized and she could be awarded degree. Today, the counsel appearing for the University submits that the Court may pass any appropriate order directing regularization of the admission/study of the petitioner. The petitioner has completed the course and has appeared in the examination. She had already been issued detailed mark sheet. There is no valid reason to deny the benefit of the study and the successful competition of the course by the petitioner. It is, therefore, now appropriate to direct the University to regularise the admission granted to the petitioner. The petitioner would be deemed to have studied in the 2nd MCA course validly and the necessary consequences including the issuance of degree may follow in due course. The present writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed. September 30, 2010 ( RANJIT SINGH ) rts JUDGE