LAWS(SC)-1996-1-151

PUNEET SARDANA Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

Decided On January 23, 1996
PUNEET SARDANA Appellant
V/S
STATE OF HARYANA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Special leave granted

(2.) The appellant, Puneet Sardana, was granted admission in the North Bengal Dental College at Siliguri in the B.D.S. course. In January, 1993 the appellant passed the first professional examination of the B.D.S. course at Siliguri and secured 381 out of600 marks. On the basis of the result of this examiantion, the appellant sought for migration to Maharishi Dayanand University at Rohtak and was granted admission to the B.D.S.course in D.A.V. Centenary Dental College, Yamuna Nagar, against a vacant seat. The appellant, however, wanted admission in the Dental College at Rohtak and, thereof, filed a Civil Writ Petition in the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, praying for a direction to the Maharishi Dayanand University to admit the appellant to the Dental College at Rohtak on the basis of the marks obtained by him. This Civil writ Petition was allowed. The Principal Dental College, Rohtak, decided to implement the judgment of the Court and an office Order was issued on 27 -12-1993 allowing the appellant's application for migration to the Dental College, Rohtak. The appellant was directed to deposit the college fee for this purpose, which the appellant did on that very day.

(3.) On 15the February, 1994 the appellant made a representation to the Maharishi Dayanand University that he had in the meantime passed the second year B.D.S. Examination held by the North Bengal Dental College at Siliguri and he should be allowed exemption from appearing in the second year examination at the Deatal College at Rohtak. On 22nd April, 1994 the appellant was informed by a letter written by the Maharishi Dayanad University that the appellant was exempted from appearing in the second year B.D.S. Examination of the University. On 23rd February, 1995 an appeal against the order of the single Judge, preferred by the University, was allowed and the admission of the appellant was cancelled.