RAJESH SUNDARAM Vs. DIBRUGARH UNIVERSITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All the above three Civil Rules involve common questions of law and similar facts and, therefore, we propose to dispose of all the Civil Rules by a common judgment.

(2.) Writ Petitioner in Civil Rule No. 3348/93 was a student of D.H.S.K. Commerce College, under Ist respondent and completed three years Degree Course in Commerce Group leading to B.Com. Degree. He appeared in Part-I of B.Com. examination on 25.5.90 conducted by the 1st respondent. The petitioner could not clear all the subjects and failed in 3 subjects, namely, Principles of Economics, Business Mathematics and Statistics and in Business Organisation and Management. In June, 1991 he appeared in the arrear subjects mentioned above. However, this time also he could clear only two subjects, but failed in Business Mathematics and Statistics. In 1992 he appeared in Business Mathematics and Statistics subjects. He appeared in B. Com Part-II examination which commenced from 24.7.92. The petitioner, however, could not pass the arrear subjects of B.Com. Part-I and, as such, the respondents withheld the result of the: Part-II examination. In 1993 he was allowed to sit in the B.Com Part-I examination to clear the arrear subjects. The said examination commenced on 5.5.93 and the petitioner appeared in the said arrear subjects. Thereafter, on 27.9.93 the respondent issued mark sheet which showed that the petitioner had passed the arrear subjects i.e. Business Mathematics and Statistics of B.Com. Part-I. But a cross mark had been put in the result column of the B.Com. Part-I mark sheet. Situated thus, the petitioner brought the matter to the notice of the Principal D.H.S.K. Commerce College, Dibrugarh and also to the respondents and submitted a representation requesting the authorities to announces the result of the Part-II examination. Petitioner also wanted to know why he was not declared as "pass" as he had already passed the Part-I examination as mentioned earlier. The respondents did not do anything. Hence the writ petition.

(3.) The case of the petitioner Pubali Bordoloi in Civil Rule No. 424/ 93 is that she was a student under the Respondent No. 1. She studied B.A. 3 years' Degree course. She first took honours and appeared in Part-I examination in the year 1989, but as she could not clear the honours paper she gave up honours and subsequently she appeared in Pass Course examination conducted by the respondent No. 1 in 1990 and she cleared all the papers except Alternative English and in that respect mark sheet was also issued by the University. Thereafter, the petitioner again appeared in the subject (Alternative English) in 1991. She could not clear the same. The petitioner also appeared in the subsequent year i.e. 1992 and cleared the same and in this respect a mark sheet was also issued by the Dibrugarh University-respondent No. 1. Thereafter, the petitioner approached the respondent for declaration of the result of the petitioner in respect of Part -I B. A. examination inasmuch as she cleared all the subjects. But the respondents refused to issue such consolidated mark sheet or pass certificate. As the petitioner cleared all the subjects inasmuch as she cleared the remaining subjects in the year 1990 and cleared Alternative English in 1992, she was entitled to get the result of Part-I examination, but the respondents arbitrarily refused to give the results. In the meantime, she appeared in the examination of Part-II also. According to this petitioner she duly appeared in the examination conducted by the University for which Admit Cards were issued and after appearance mark sheets were also issued by the respondents. But the respondents refused to issue a consolidated mark sheet showing the result of the petitioner which according to the petitioner is absolutely arbitrary, illegal and unjust. Hence the present petition.