VIKASH KUMAR SINGH Vs. UNIVERSITY OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner was admitted to the M.A.(Social Work) course of the Department of Social Work of the respondent no.1 University in the year 2009 and was also provided Hostel accommodation in the said Department. THE petitioner could not clear the first semester examination held in or about December, 2009. However as per the Rules he was still promoted to the second semester and successfully cleared the second semester examination held in April, May, 2010 and was promoted to the third semester. THE petitioner was required to take both the first and the third semester examinations scheduled to be held in November, 2010. It is the case of the petitioner that the respondent no.2 being the Head of Department of Social Work and who is also a Provost of the Hostel of the said Department developed enmity towards the petitioner and owing whereto he first issued notice to show cause to the petitioner on the ground of misconduct in the Hostel, on false and frivolous grounds and upon being not in a position to prove, ended merely in a warning. THE petitioner pleads that in furtherance of the said enmity, the respondent no.2 first issued a Memo dated 20th September, 2010 to the petitioner to the effect that the petitioner had not submitted the Field Work Reports "from last one month" and that the petitioner had not attended any individual conference "for last three weeks" and thereafter issued another Memo dated 30th September, 2010 complaining that the petitioner had not attended Field Work "for the last two months" and also not submitted any report for the same and had also not attended or submitted group conference paper or made presentation thereon. It was also mentioned in the Memo dated 30th September, 2010 that the petitioner had thus rendered himself ineligible to appear in the Field Work examination. It was yet further mentioned in the said notice that the classroom attendance of the petitioner was also negligible and as such the examination form of the petitioner could not be forwarded to the Examination Branch.

(2.) THE petitioner contends that the falsity of the Memos dated 20th September, 2010 and 30th September, 2010 is evident from inconsistencies therein, though only 10 days apart.

(3.) THE petitioner on 29th October, 2010 submitted to the Department that he was suffering from a viral fever from 21st August, 2010; he had tried to attend Field Work activities but from 5th September, 2010 had been unable to attend the Field Work activities also. THE said letter was accompanied with a Medical Certificate issued by a Doctor at Allahabad who certified that the petitioner was under his treatment from 21st August, 2010 to 29th September, 2010.