MANISHA Vs. LAXMI BAI COLLEGE AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present petition is filed by the petitioner, who is a student of respondent No. 1/College praying inter alia for quashing of the notice dated 22.09.2011 issued by respondent No. 1/College, declining her request for seeking a transfer from B.A. (Programme) course to B.A.English (Hons.) course on the ground that the said request was received after the cut -off date specified by the University of Delhi, i.e., after 30.08.2011.

(2.) COUNSEL for the petitioner submits that the aforesaid notice runs contrary to the consent given by the Vice -Principal of the respondent No. 1/College, to the petitioner on 14.9.2011, for being transferred from B.A. (Programme) course to B.A. English (Hons.), which was duly endorsed by the Head of the English Department of respondent No. 1/College. In this regard, he draws the attention of this Court to the documents enclosed with the petition as Annexure P -2. He submits that pursuant to receiving the aforesaid consent, the petitioner proceeded to deposit the fee of Rs.200/ - for the change of course to B.A.English (Hons.) (Annexure P -3) and even attended the classes for B.A. English (Hons.) w.e.f. 14.09.2011 to 29.09.2011. However, after issuance of the impugned notice dated 22.09.2011, the petitioner was reverted back to the B.A. (Programme) course and was also issued a notice dated 27.09.2011, calling upon her to submit her University Examination Form for the 1st Semester 2011 in respect of the B.A. (Programme) course. Counsel for the petitioner further states that the petitioner has been discriminated against as in similar circumstances, another student, namely, Ms. Hem Lata was granted fresh admission to B.A.English (Hons.) course on 19.09.2011, even though her request for the same was made to respondent No. 1/College much after the cut -off date as prescribed by the University of Delhi.

(3.) COUNSELS for respondents have brought Clause 3 of Ordinance II of the University of Delhi to the notice of this Court, which mandates that admissions shall be finalized by the Principals of Colleges and Deans of Faculties concerned, as the case may be, not later than such last date as may be prescribed by the Academic Council from time to time. A proviso has been carved out in the aforesaid clause to the extent that the Vice -Chancellor has the discretion to allow admission after the prescribed last date inter alia for very exceptional reasons. In the present case, in light of the fact that the petitioner applied for a transfer to the B.A.English (Hons.) course well past the prescribed last date i.e. 30.8.2011 and considering the fact that the consent for admission beyond the cut off date was given by the Vice -Principal of respondent No. 1 who was not competent to do so, and not by the Principal as required under the provision, this Court does not find any illegality or perversity in the impugned notice dated 22.9.2011, which is upheld.