JAYSHREE RAVI Vs. UNIVERSITY OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mr. P.P. Malhotra, Sr. Advocate with Mr. R.K. Saini, Adv. This is a petition by the petitioners who secured 47.75 per cent marks and 46 per cent marks respectively in their graduate examination conducted by the University of Delhi. The respondent. Faculty of Law, University of Delhi issued an advertisement declaring that admission to the LL.B. three years degree course for the academic year 1992-93 would be on the basis of CW 2603/92 entrance test conducted by the respondents. Advertisement further said that the test was open only to the candidates who had passed Master/B.A. Degree examination securing at least 50 per cent marks in the aggregate. Subsequently, date for receipt of application and the date of entrance examination was changed to 2nd August, 1992. The petitioners submitted their application forms and they further contended that eligibility of 50 per cent marks for appearing in the entrance examination was illegal, arbitrary and irrational. By virtue of the interim orders the petitioners were allowed to take the examination provisionally subject to the final determination of the writ petition. The Division Bench of this Court (Mahinder Narain and Jaspal Singh JJ.) took divergent views while Mahinder Narain J. allowed the writ petition and declared the prescription of minimum 50 per cent marks in B.A. as a condition precedent for taking the entrance examination as arbitrary, unreasonable and the same being violative of provisions of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and on this ground struck the eligibility criteria of ' 50 per cent and quashed the same while another member of the Division Bench (Jaspal Singh J.) held that eligibility condition was not in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and, therefore, disagreed with the view taken by Mahinder Narain J. In view of the difference of opinion between two Judges a reference was made by the said Division Bench to refer the matter to a third Judge to the following effect:-

(2.) It is, in these circumstances, that the matter was referred to a third Judge (C.L.Chaudhry J.) who vide his order dated 22nd January, 1993 on an applications issued certain directions to the University to declare the result of the petitioners and grant them provisional admission to appear in the First Semester Examination of the LL.B. Course. On hearing the parties C.L.Chaudhry J. allowed the applications and directed the University to declare the result of the petitioners within 3 days and in case they secure more marks than the last candidate who was given admission by the University of Delhi, the petitioners would also be given admission provisionally and they will be allowed to take the 1st Semester Examination. However, it was made clear in that order that the grant of provisional admission and taking of the 1st Semester Examination shall not confer any right in favour of the petitioners in case they ultimately fail in the writ petition.

(3.) Aggrieved by this order, the University filed the appeal before the Supreme Court by way of Special Leave Petition.