PUNAMBHAI G KACHHIA Vs. DIRECTOR OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Should there be adherence to the rules and regulations even when an expedient course is adopted by the Executive ? Not expressly but by necessary implication the Governments stand is that in a given situation it may compromise with the rules and regulations. Aggrieved by such a stance adopted by the Government the petitioners have moved this High Court by filing petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution in representative capacity and prayed that the Government be directed to admit the students who have become the victims of such adhocism to the third semester of different courses in the Polytechnics in the State.

(2.) By a resolution dated 5/05/1982 the State of Gujarat introduced a technical bias course at the Higher Secondary level. The students who take this course are required to appear in twelve subjects besides the common subjects of science stream. The students passing higher secondary examination with the technical bias subjects were to be considered eligible for an intended diploma or certificate course for a period of six to eighteen months. However such course could not be started by the Government. Therefore the Government resolved that students passing their Higher Secondary Examination with the aforesaid subjects be admitted straight to the third semester of Civil Mechanical and Electrical Diploma courses in the polytechnics. The Joint Secretary Education Department addressed a letter to this effect some time in September 1983 to the Chairman Gujarat Higher Secondary Education Board (Annexure-B to the petition.). As per this letter such students were to be considered eligible for being admitted to the third semester of various Diploma Courses. In the year 1983-84 and 1984 all such students were considered eligible for admission to the third semester of diploma courses and they were given admission. In October 1986 the Government advertised that the students who have passed the 12th standard examination with technical bias subjects may apply for being admitted to the third semester in different polytechnics of the State. The wards of the petitioners herein and other students applied in response to the advertisement. In all there were 148 such students. Out of these 148 students only 46 students have been admitted. Other students have been denied admission.

(3.) It may be noted that there is some discrepancy with regard to the number. In the petition it is stated that in all there were 148 students who had applied while in the affidavit in reply it is stated that there were 133 students who had applied and out of 133 fortysix students have been admitted. However this minor discrepancy in the number is not very much material for the purpose of the decision of this petition.