1 S.B.C.W. NO. 5446/2009 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR O R D E R S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 5446/2009 Desh Raj Dagur Vs. State of Rajasthan and Others Date of Order : : 26.05.2009 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.R. PANWAR Dr. S.S.Jodha for the petitioner. Mr. Sandeep Bhandawat, Govt. Counsel for respondent Ayurved University. BY THE COURT Heard learned counsel for the parties. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that some of the students who failed in 4th and 5th attempt were permitted to appear in the examination though the governing provision provides that the candidates who fail to pass the First Ayurvedacharya (Bachelor of Ayurvedic Medicine & Surgery) Examination in three attempts shall not be allowed to continue their studies in a college. The petitioner earlier filed a writ petition being S.B.Civil Writ Petition No. 5178/09 on the same ground and by order dated 22.5.2009 the petitioner was permitted to represent the respondent University showing the instances wherein the admissions have been given to some of 2 S.B.C.W. NO. 5446/2009 the students even they failed in 4th and 5th attempts and the respondent University was directed to consider and decide the representation by 25.5.2009. In pursuance thereof, by order dated 23.5.09 Annex.9, the representation filed by the petitioner came to be rejected. I have carefully gone through the order Annex.9 dated 23.5.2009. The order Annex.9 clearly speaks that Rajasthan Ayurved University Jodhpur till date has not given any permission to any student beyond the 3rd attempt as envisage in the Rule 29-N-19 (j) of University of Rajasthan, Jaipur. However, so far as two persons named by the petitioner in the representation namely Tej Pal Serawat and Pushpendra Kumar whose mark sheets have been placed by the petitioner before the University showing their 4th and 5th attempts, are concerned, the University clearly came with a case that the cases relates to University of Rajasthan and not the Rajasthan Ayurved University, Jodhpur. At any rate, the governing provision do not permit for allowing a student to appear who failed in three attempts. In my view, the respondent University was justified in passing the order impugned rejecting the representation of the petitioner. The order is strictly in accordance with the Ordinance 329-N-19 (j) of the University of Rajasthan. In these circumstances, no case for interference is 3 S.B.C.W. NO. 5446/2009 made out. The writ petition is therefore, dismissed. However, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since the petitioner is not being permitted to appear, therefore, the fee deposited by the petitioner may be directed to be refunded to him. If any such fees is deposited by the petitioner, the University shall refund the same since the petitioner has not been permitted to appear in the examination. (H.R. PANWAR), J. Rp 4 S.B.C.W. NO. 5446/2009 S.B.Civil Misc. Stay Petition No. 8648/2009 In S.B.Civil Writ Petition No. 5446/2009 Date of Order : 26.05.2009 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.R. PANWAR Dr. S.S.Jodha for the petitioner. Mr. Sandeep Bhandawat, Govt. Counsel for respondent Ayurved University. Since the writ petition itself has been dismissed, the stay petition also stands dismissed. (H.R. PANWAR), J. Rp