SANJAYKUMAR VARMA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is an Engineering student pursuing a degree course in P. D. A. College at gulbarga affiliated to the 2nd respondent-Gulbarga University. Results for the 5th Semester examination conducted in March 1999 showed that the petitioner had failed in Ceramic engineering Thermo Dynamics. He applied for the grant of grace marks admissible as per the ordinance issued by the University, which request was turned down having regard to a circular dated 7-5-1999 issued by the University according to which award of grace marks was impermissible in view of the directions issued by this Court in W. P. No, 31741 of 1998, disposed of on 24-11-1998. Aggrieved, the petitioner has in the present writ petition assailed the correctness of the circular in question and prayed for a mandamus directing the University to award the permissible grace marks.

(2.) SRI Naik, Counsel appearing for the petitioner argued that the impugned circular had been issued by the University on a total misunderstanding of the true purport of the order of this Court in the writ petition mentioned earlier. He urged that the general direction issued in the said case had no application to courses in which the authority functioning under the relevant Central enactment had not formulated any norms or framed any regulations governing the conduct of examinations or matters relating thereto. No regulations having been framed and no norms stipulated by the All India Council for Technical Education under the A. I. C. T. E. Act, the conduct of examinations for Engineering courses had to be in accordance with the rules and regulations framed or ordinances issued by the affiliating University. If any such rules/regulations or ordinances envisage award of grace marks to candidates eligible for the same, the grant of such marks could not be refused only because there was in existence a Central enactment or an Apex Body constituted under the same. The order of this Court in W. P. No. 31741 of 1998, it was argued was in the context of Medical and Dental Courses where the regulations framed by the respective Councils have fixed norms for passing the examinations which were different from those prescribed by the affiliating Universities. In any such situation where there is a conflict between the norms fixed by the Central body and those prescribed by the University generally, the norms prescribed by the Central body had to be given effect to. The direction of this Court should have been understood in that spirit alone, in which case the circular issued by the University could not make the University regulations/ordinances universally inapplicable.

(3.) MR. Bhat, Counsel appearing for the respondent-University as also A. I. C. T. E. which was added as a party to these proceedings by order dated 24-6-1999 has filed a statement of objections on behalf of the latter. The statement specifically records that neither the A. I. C. T. E. Act nor the regulations made thereunder prescribe any minimum marks to be secured by a candidate for passing the B. E. Degree Examination conducted by the concerned affiliating universities. Sri Bhat argued by reference to the statement filed by him that the A. I. C. T. E. has not prescribed any norms nor framed any regulations for the conduct of B. E. Examinations and that the award of Degrees and the conduct of examinations for such courses is governed exclusively by the regulations, ordinances, statutes and rules framed by the affiliating universities concerned.