GYANDEEP SHARMA Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioners.

(2.) The petitioners have come up challenging the action of the respondents in proceedings to declare results which according to them is contrary to the norms prescribed under the ordinances framed by the respondent University for the 4/5 year under Graduate Degree Programme. A copy of the Ordinances have been placed on record as Annexure 3 to the writ petition.

(3.) The petitioners' contention is that other students who had less than 27 credits have been promoted to the next Class which fact is being pressed into service for the purpose that the petitioners also have less than 27 credits therefore they are entitled to the same benefit. The contention therefore is that the respondent University has discriminated the petitioners.