KALEEM FATIMA Vs. JAMIA MILIA ISLAMIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN the present petitions filed by two petitioners, who had appeared for admissions in the BDS (Dentistry) Course in respondent No.1/University in the academic year 2010-11 and were admitted to the said course, challenge has been laid to the action of the respondent No.1/University in detaining them due to deficiency in attendance and in refusing to grant them permission to appear in the annual examination for the course in question. The petitioners have also sought directions to the respondents to re-admit them in the BDS (Dentistry) course in the first year for the academic year 2011-12. As the facts of both the cases are almost similar, for the sake of convenience, the facts submitted in W.P.(C) No.6499/2011 are being taken note of.

(2.) THE undisputed facts of the case are that on 30.06.2010, the petitioners had appeared for the written examination for admission in the first year BDS (Dentistry) Course in the academic year 2010-11. On 08.07.2010, the result of the written examination was declared and the petitioners were duly selected. On 28.07.2010, the petitioners were admitted by the respondents in the first year BDS (Dentistry) Course for the academic year 2010-11. Classes for the first year of the said course were held w.e.f 02.08.2010 to 30.05.2011. THE annual examination of the aforesaid course was to be held w.e.f. 30.05.2011, but the said date was deferred to 28.07.2011. However, the petitioners were not permitted to appear in the final examination due to shortage of attendance which was intimated to them by the respondents vide letter dated 14.06.2011.

(3.) IT may be noted that the aforesaid Rule 5 of the Prospectus was amended by the respondent No.1/University in its prospectus issued for the academic year 2011-12 wherein sub-rule (9) of Rule 5 reads as below:-