J PRAKASH Vs. REGISTRAR NAGARJUNA UNIVERSITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In these three writ petitions, a common question is being agitated by all these petitioners and therefore, these three writ petitions are disposed of by a common order.

(2.) All these petitioners claim that they were all candidates for B.A., B.Com. and B.Sc. and other faculties graduating themselves under the New Scheme Syllabus which was in vogue from 1980 onwards. From the year 1987-88, the respondent-University had introduced a Common Core Syllabus regulations for degree students as a result of which the pattern of syllabus and subjects were changed from that of New Syllabus Scheme in which the petitioners studied. It is stated by these petitioners that though the New Scheme Syllabus ceased to be in force from the academic year 1987-88 consequent upon the introduction of Common Core Syllabus, students who were graduating themselves under the new Scheme Syllabus were allowed to complete their backlog subjects under the New Scheme Syllabus. These petitioners appeared as private candidates and completed few subjects. It is stated that in the year 1992, the respondent- University issued notification stating that the New Scheme Syllabus is no more available to the old students enabling them to complete the backlog subjects and it was intimated that those who are interested to complete graduation were asked to appear in the left-over papers according to the Common Core Syllabus. It is stated that the introduction of Common Core Syllabus is without notice to these petitioners and similarly placed students. It is alleged that if the introduction of the Common Core Syllabus had been given wide publicity, petitioners-like students would have completed their graduation according to the New Scheme Syllabus and would have obtained their degrees. The petitioners are prevented from completing their back-logs under the New Syllabus Scheme, which they allege to be violative of the principles of natural justice. In the year 1994, the second respondent issued a notification on 24-6-1994 which appeared in various news papers intimating the candidates that who have failed to complete their back-logs, were required to repeat their degree course if they are intending to do so as fresh candidates and the last date of payment of fees and receipt of examination applications were fixed as 25-7-1994 and the date of examination was fixed as 14-9-1994. Petitioners allege that the decision of the respondent-University to implement the Common Core Syllabus with effect from September 1994 has put these petitioners to a lot of inconvenience and they contend that the respondent-University should have given sufficient notice and some more chances for the petitioners-like students to complete their back-logs as per the New Scheme Syllabus.

(3.) It is seen from the docket order that Writ Petition No.15920/94 was admitted by this Court on 8-9-1994 and notices were directed in the said writ petition. W.P.M.P. No.27973 of 1994 came up for consideration before this Court and this Court by an order dated 10-2-1995 issued interim direction to the respondent-University to receive the examination fee by 20-2-1995 and to permit the petitioners to appear for the examinations that were likely to be held on 15-3-1995 in the back-log subjects. The respondent-University has filed vacate petition in W.P.M.P. No.427/95 in the said W.P.M.P. No.27973 of 1994. When the vacate petition came up for consideration, at the request of the Counsel appearing in this writ petition and the connected two writ petitions on the similar point filed by different Counsel, these writ petitions are heard together and are now being disposed of.