UPENDRA SHARMA Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing respondent Nos. 2 and 3 to admit him to Bachelor of Engineering Three Years Course of the Mechanical Engineering in the second year/third semester under the Lateral Entry Scheme.

(2.) THE petitioner did his 10+2 examination (Non -medical) from the Central Board of Secondary Education in the year 1997 as a student of Government Model Senior Secondary School, Chandigarh. Thereafter, he joined three years Diploma Course in Mechanical Engineering as a student of Punjab State Board of Technical Education and Industrial Training, Chandigarh (hereinafter referred to as 'the Board"). He appeared in the examination of the aforesaid Diploma Course in May 2000. Before the declaration of his result in the aforesaid course, he applied for admission to second year/third semester of Bachelor of Engineering/Technology under the Lateral Entry Engineering Test -2000 (hereinafter referred to as LEET -2000) on 16.7.2000. The eligibility criteria for LEET -2000 laid in the prospectus is that the candidate should have passed Diploma in Engineering/Technology under the relevant branch from the Board or Sant Longowal Institute of Engineering and Technology (hereinafter referred to as 'SLIET'), with a minimum of 60% marks in aggregate or equivalent grade point in case of SLIET Diploma. The petitioner secured 2942 marks out of total marks of 4800 which comes to 61.29% in the last year of the Three Year Diploma Course, result of which was declared on 1.8.2000. The petitioner had appeared in LEET -2000 on 16.7.2000 and secured 250 marks out of 600 and was ranked 35 among the general category candidates. When he appeared for counselling on 18.8.2000, he was informed that he was ineligible to seek admission to the said course as he did not fulfil the eligibility criteria as laid down in Rule 26 of the Examination Rules of the State Board of Technical Education and Industrial Training, Punjab (hereinafter referred to as the Examination Rules') adopted by respondent, according to which award of the year in which the candidate is to be placed is to be determined on the basis of the percentage of marks in different semesters. For the first two semesters 25% marks were to be taken into account. In the third and fourth semesters credit upto 50% of the marks is to be given. For the fifth and sixth semesters 100% marks are required to be taken into account. Applying the above system of awarding marks, he was denied admission to the course. It has been averred by the petitioner that the action of the respondents in denying admission to the course to him was in violation of para 3 of part -A of LEET -2000 prospectus/information -cum -admission brochure and the methodology of determining eligibility to the course on the basis of award of division as laid down in the aforesaid Rule 26 was never indicated in the prospectus. Therefore, respondent No. 3 could not deviate from the provisions of the prospectus which has force of law. It was also pleaded by him that the adoption of the examination rules of the Board, Chandigarh had no legislative sanction and validity in terms of the provisions of Sections 38 and 39 of the Punjab State Board of Technical Education and Industrial Training Act, 1992 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 1992'). On these premises, the petitioner has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

(3.) THERE is no factual dispute with regard to the marks earned by the petitioner in the six semesters during the period of three years of the diploma course. The controversy relates entirely to the methodology of evaluation for the purpose of determining eligibility criteria laid down in the prospectus read with Rule 26 of the Examination Rules. It is necessary to notice the marks earned by the petitioner in the six semesters of the diploma course in detail, as mentioned in Annexure -P.3 and the same are as under : -