HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** CWP No.17294 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: 22.11.2011 **** Sarita Kumari . . . . Petitioner VS. Kurukshetra University & Anr. . . . . Respondents **** CORAM : HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT **** 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? **** Present: Mr. Ramesh Goyat, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. AS Virk, Advocate for respondent No.1 Mr. Amit Singla, Advocate for respondent No.2 ***** SURYA KANT, J. (ORAL) (1). The petitioner passed her BA examination with 41.75% marks. She thereafter did MA in History from Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak with more than 50% marks as is evident from Result-cum-Detailed Marks Card dated September 19, 2008, which has been placed on record during the course of hearing and is marked as ‘A’. (2). It is not in dispute that as per the University Regulations, a candidate is required to possess minimum 45% marks in Graduation for admission to BPEd./B.Ed. The petitioner, who got more than 50% marks in MA was fully eligible and was granted admission in BPEd. in the Academic Session 2008-09 by respondent No.2-College. Her admission was CWP No.17294 of 2010.doc - 2 – cancelled after about 10 months i.e. on 3rd March 2009 by the University on the premise that her marks in BA were less than 45% and that in her admission form the only qualification mentioned by her was BA. (3). It further appears that the Principal of respondent No.2- College informed the University about the MA qualification possessed by the petitioner but it did not alter the decision already taken by the University. (4). The aggrieved petitioner has approached this Court. (5). Reply/affidavit has been filed and learned counsel for the parties have been heard. (6). There is indeed no quarrel that the petitioner got admission in the BPEd. Course in the academic session 2008-09. Even if it is assumed that the Detailed Marks Card (Mark ‘A’) of MA (History) of the petitioner was issued on September 19, 2008, it will relate back to the month of the final year examination i.e. May, 2008. The petitioner was thus a Postgraduate with 50% marks in May 2008 and was fully eligible for admission in BPEd. Course in the academic session 2008-09. (7). For the reasons afore-stated, the writ petition is allowed; the impugned order dated 03.03.2009 (Annexure R-1/2) is quashed and the respondent-University is directed to declare the petitioner’s result in BPEd. Course within a CWP No.17294 of 2010.doc - 3 – period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. (8). Ordered accordingly. Dasti. 22.11.2011 vishal shonkar (S u r y a K a n t) Judge