MANDEEP KANG Vs. PUNJAB UNIVERSITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Miss Mandeep Kang through present petition field by her under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India seeks writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to grant her admission to the 1st semester of the LL.B.(Three Years Course) for the sessions 1999-2000 either at Amritsar or at Chandigarh on the dint of her improving upon marks in the qualifying examination on re-evaluation. Concededly, as on date when considered she did not have requisite marks necessarily required for admission to the course under contention and therefore, the only question that needs adjudication in the present writ petition is as to whether if on re-evaluation a candidate obtains requisite marks in the qualifying examination for the course in question, even though the said candidate did not qualify even for consideration, such improvement in marks can be taken into consideration for admission in the course.

(2.) Relevant facts giving rise to this petition reveal that petitioner passed her matriculation examination in the year 1993 and plus two examinations in the year 1995. She joined three years degree course in Government College, Chandigarh in the year 1997. She appeared in B.A.Part III examination in the year 1999. The respondent University in April, 1999 gave a public notice for holding entrance test for admission to LL.B.(Three Years Course) which was common for Department of Laws, Punjab University, Chandigarh and Punjab University Regional Central, Muktsar. Petitioner appeared in the entrance test held on 17-6-1999 result whereof was declared on 30-6-1999. The petitioner got merit position No. 1303. However, the result of petitioner of the examination of B.A.Part III was declared on 22-7-1999. She obtained 1061 marks in three degree course which was concededly, less than 45% marks, After declaration of the result of entrance test, petitioner submitted separate application forms for admission to respondents 2 and 3. Her case for admission was not considered as she had not obtained minimum 45% marks in aggregate in the qualifying examination i.s. B.A.Petitioner applied for re-evaluation of B.A.Part III examination and in Nov. 1999, the University declared the result of re-evaluation of B.A.Part III examination. Petitioner improved on her marks from 332 to 354 and in this manner aggrieved marks became more than 45%, thus, making the petitioner eligible for admission to the LL.B.(Three Years Course). On improvement of marks as mentioned above, the petitioner submitted a representation to the Punjab University Regional Centre, Mukatsar, respondent No. 3, with a copy to the Vice Chancellor pleading therein that in view of the re-evaluation of marks in the qualifying examination she was entitled to admission in LL.B.(Three Years Course) and that her case for admission may now be considered. When the representation of the petitioner evoked no interest with the respondent, present writ petition for the relief as detailed above was filed.

(3.) Before we might proposed to deal with the only question that needs determination in the present case and which has been noted above, it is relevant to mention that it has been pleaded and so argued by the Counsel representing the petitioner that as per rules and regulations of the University, in case of re-evaluation of marks, the case of a candidate is to be reconsidered for admission. However, no rule or regulation has either been pleaded in the writ petition nor brought to the notice of the Court during the course of arguments. Sans such a rule or regulation, the matter needs to be determined on the basis of provisions contained in the prospectus and in particular Rule 1 according to which candidates who had appeared/re-appeared in the qualifying examination as applicable under the relevant course during the academic session 1998-99 were also eligible to take entrance test but their admission to the test was purely provisional and was to stand cancelled if they did not pass the qualifying examination securing the prescribed percentage of marks. It may be mentioned at this stage that even though Rule 1 has not been reproduced but mention thereof has been made in para 5 of the writ petition. The writ is silent with regard to cut off date after which no admissions were to be made to the course under contention. It is significant to mention at this stage that whereas entrance test was held, on 17-6-1999, result, thereof was declared on 30-6-1999, the result of B.A.Part III was declared, on 22-7-1999. Still further, petitioner had applied for re-evaluation of her marks in B.A.Part III in July, 1999 result whereof was declared in Nov. 1999. In the declaration of result of the entrance test till such time result of re-evaluation of marks was declared, there was a time lag of about five months. It is also significant to mention that by the time the result of entrance test was declared, the petitioner was not eligible for admission to LL.B.(Three Years Course) as the result of her qualifying examination had not been declared by then.