GIRIJA SHESHU Vs. BANGALORE UNIVERSITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner Girija Seshu applied to the Bangalore University - respondent-1 herein - claiming admission to Master's Degree Course in Music leading to a Degree of Master of Arts. That was in the academic year 1983-84. With reference to that application of hers, by an endorsement dated 2-9-1983 she was informed by the Head of the Department of Dance, Drama and Music of respondent-1 University that she should appear before him at 11 a. m. on 13-9-1983 with all the original documents. That she so appeared is not in dispute at all. After that interview, she was admitted to the course provisionally. That is also not in dispute. It was only on 17-5-84 at the end of the academic year 1983-84 she was informed that she must be discharged from the Department because she had not secured the required percentage of marks at degree level. Soon thereafter, the petitioner made a representation dated 21-5-1984 setting out in detail her claims to have been properly admitted. Such a representation was also made to the Vice-Chancellor in July 1984. These are all duly evidenced by the true copies of those correspondences and memos which are annexed to the Petition. She also brought to the notice of the University the special training she had undergone under various Vidhwans in Music. Despite all these, her provisional admission came to be cancelled by on order dated 10-9-1984 by which the Principal of the College where she has studied-respondent-3 herein-was informed that her admission was cancelled and she should be discharged from the Department. Aggrieved by the same, she has approached this Court and obtained interim direction to prosecute her studies further and also appear at the examination held at the end of two years course.

(2.) The matter has remained without being heard despite issue of rule nisi on 5 10-1984. The reasons for not disposing it of earlier need not be of serious concern to us.

(3.) Respondent-1, i.e. University of Bangalore, respondent-2 Controller of Examinations and respondent-3 the Principal of Central College are all served and the University is represented by Counsel. Learned Counsel for the petitioner and Counsel for respondent-1 have been heard. No statement of objections as such has been formally filed by the respondent-University.