IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP No. 7463 of 2011 Decided on: 22.9.2011 _____________________________________________ Kumar Karan …Petitioner. Versus HP University & Others. …Respondents. ________________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, Chief Justice. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No For the petitioner : Mr. Dilip Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. B.C. Negi, Advocate for respondents No. 1 & 2. _____________________________________________________ Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge (oral). Petitioner was admitted to B.A.L.LB five years course in academic session 2007-2008. He joined the said course on 9.7.2007. The result of B.A.L.LB (Hons) 6th Semester held in June, 2010 was declared on 8.10.2010. The result was declared as per Annexure P-1. Petitioner has secured 17/27 marks out of 100 marks in Course XXIII (Law of Evidence) and 17/35 marks out of 100 marks in XXIV (Code of Criminal Procedure) and he was required to re-appear 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No 2 in these two papers. Petitioner applied for re- evaluation, the result whereof was declared on 14.2.2011. Petitioner secured 17/29 marks out of 100 marks in Course XXIII (Law of Evidence) and 17/33 marks out of 100 marks in Course XXIV (Code of Criminal Procedure). He was again required to re- appear in these two papers as per result card. In fact, the petitioner was supposed to secure 18 marks in practical and 27 marks in theory. Petitioner had already secured 17/27 marks in the main examination held in the month of June, 2010 and 17/35 marks in courses XXIII and XXIV respectively and was only required to appear in the practical examination permissible as per ordinance 12.9 (A) notified on 4.4.2005. Petitioner thereafter again appeared in supplementary examination held in the month of November/December, 2010. The result was declared on 8.4.2011. Petitioner secured 17/30 marks in Course XXIII and 17/23 marks in Course XXIV. Petitioner was shown “fail” in Course XXIV since he had only secured 23 marks in theory examination. 2. We are of the considered view that since the petitioner had already passed Course XXIV in 3 theory examination by securing 17/27 marks and 17/35 marks in Courses XXIII & XXIV respectively, he was not required to appear in supplementary examination of theory held in the month of November/December, 2010. He was only required to appear in the practical examination. He was also not supposed to apply for re-evaluation so far as theory examination is concerned, since he had already passed the same. 3. Petitioner had met the Principal of the College and has apprised him that he was not required to sit in the supplementary examination of theory since he had already qualified the same in the examination held in the month of June, 2010. However, the fact of the matter is that the result has not been declared, though the petitioner had completed the practical training in the month of March, 2011. 4. Consequently, in view of the observations and discussions made hereinabove, the present writ petition is allowed. Respondents are directed to declare the result of the petitioner of B.A.L.LB (Hons) 6th Semester on the basis of marks obtained by him in theory courses XXIII and XXIV declared on 8.10.2010 4 and the marks obtained by him in the practical examination conducted during March, 2011 by the respondent-college within a period of two weeks from today. In case the petitioner has qualified the examination, he will be permitted to continue in 9th Semester. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. No costs. (Justice Kurian Joseph) Chief Justice. (Justice Rajiv Sharma), Judge. 22.9.2011 *awasthi*