JAYANT PRATAP SINGH Vs. DIRECTOR TECHNICAL EDUCATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present writ petition preferred under Article 226 of the constitution of India was dealt with by the learned single Judge of this Court who faced with the decision rendered in the case of ankita Sinha v. Rajiv Gandhi Proudyogiki vishwavidyalaya and others 2006 (1) MPLJ 489 : (AIR 2006 MP 62) expressed his respectful disagreement with the view opined therein and thereafter proceeded to refer the following two questions of law to be determined by the Larger Bench:-

(2.) THE facts in a nutshell are that the writ petitioner completed his Xllth Class board Examination from Springer Public school Gorakhpur, Jabapur conducted by the Council for the Indian School Certificate examination, new Delhi (hereinafter referred to as 'the ISCE' ). As per the Rules of ISCE he was declared passed. He had not obtained minimum passing marks in the subject of mathematics. He applied for admission in b. E. Course and appeared in Pre engineering Pharmacy Test and Pre-Agriculture Test 2004 conducted by the Professional examination Board, Bhopal on 12-6-2004. He was declared successful in the aforesaid examination and was given admission in the college of the respondent No. 5. He had deposited the requisite fee for the first semester and the examinations were scheduled to commence 5-2-2005. Before the date of examination the respondent No. 4, Chairman, central Counselling Committee, Rajiv gandhi Proudyogik Vishwa Vidyalaya, bhopal issued a letter on 12-1-2005 by which the respondent No. 5 College was informed that the admission of the petitioner had been cancelled because he had not cleared the qualifying examination.

(3.) IT was contended before the learned single Judge that he was declared passed in the qualifying examination with main subjects, namely, Mathematics, Physics and chemistry and, therefore, he was entitled to the admission in B. E. Course and such a qualification meets the criteria postulated under Rule 2. 4. 1. 1 for admission in B. E. Course. It was put-forth that he had passed with the main subjects, namely, mathematics, Physics and Chemistry and it was not necessary that he should pass in each individual subject. The second plank of argument was that he had not concealed any material fact and the respondents, being well aware that he had cleared the qualifying examination with the main subjects had extended the benefit of admission and hence, there was no rhyme or reason to cancel the same.