Case: University of Rajasthan, Jaipur Vs. Roshan Lal Seth

1. The respondent Roshan Lal Seth offered Economics as his subject for the M. A. Examination. A candidate may take the M. A. Examination either at the end of the two years integrated course of study or he may appear first in the M. A. Previous Examination and then in the M. A. Final Examination. The respondent opted for the second alternative. In the Previous Examination he appeared in four papers and obtained 25% marks or more in each paper. He also obtained more than 36% of the aggregate marks in the four papers. In the Final Examination he obtained 25% or more mark in each of the four papers. But he failed to obtain 36% of the aggregate marks in the four papers. So the University (the appellant) declared him unsuccessful in the M. A. Examination. Feeling aggrieved, he filed a writ petition in the Rajasthan High Court. The argument before the High Court was that as he has obtained 36% of the aggregate marks in the eight papers, he should have been declared successful in accordance with Regulation 12. The High Court has accepted this argument and has directed the University to declare the respondent as successful in the M. A. Examination. Hence this appeal by the University.

Court's reasoning:
5. The High Court has laid more stress on the words "in each subject" in the Regulation. The subject offered by the respondent no doubt was Economics. But it was his subject in the M. A. Previous Examination as well as in the M. A. Final Examination. So it was necessary for him to obtain at least 36% of the aggregate marks in this subject in the Previous Examination as well as in the Final Examination. In M. A. a candidate is required to take only one of the subjects enumerated in Ordinance 213. Ordinance 213 contains a list of 15 subjects. Economics is one of them. The phrase "in each subject" in the Regulation is likely to create an impression that a candidate has to offer more than one subject in the M. A. Examination. But on a fair reading of the Regulation we have no doubt in our mind as to what it means. A candidate must obtain for a pass at least 36% of the aggregate marks in the subject offered by him in the Previous Examination as well as in the Final Examination.6. As the language of the Regulation is plain and unambiguous, it is not legitimate to refer to its history to elucidate its meaning.7. Having regard to the foregoing discussion, we are of opinion that the High Courts construction of Regulation 12 is not correct. The appeal is accordingly allowed and the order of the High Court is set aside. However, in accordance with the earlier order of the Court, the appellant shall bear the costs of the respondent.