RAHUL GUPTA Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order will dispose of two Civil Writ Petitions 10717 and 11399 of 2000 in which common questions of law and fact arise. Arguments were, however, addressed in Civil Writ Petition 10717 of 2000 and the facts are being taken therefrom.

(2.) After passing his 10+2 examination from the Central Board of Secondary Education the petitioner appeared in the year 1997 in the entrance test for seeking admission to the 3 years Diploma Course. He was successful in the test and was admitted to the course in the discipline of Electronics and Communication Engineering. He was admitted to the Government Polytechnic, Narnaul, District Mohindergarh. In the prospectus that was published by the Directorate of Technical Education, Haryana for the academic session 1997-98 in which Session the petitioner was admitted, the duration of the course was mentioned as 3 years. Petitioner successfully completed the first five semesters of the course and appeared for the 6th semester examination in June, 2000. In the meantime, YMCA Institution of Engineering, Faridabad issued a notice in the press that it would conduct the Lateral Entry Engineering Test- 2000 (LEET) on July 23, 2000 for admission to the second year third semester of Bachelor of Technology/Bachelor of Engineering courses in various engineering institutes/colleges in the State of Haryana for the academic sessions 2000-2001. Candidates who had passed the diploma course of duration of 3 years or more in the relevant discipline from Haryana Board of Technical Education or its equivalent with at least 60% marks in the aggregate were eligible to appear in this entrance test. Candidates who had appeared in the diploma examination and whose results had not by then been declared were also eligible to appear in the LEET. Petitioner appeared in LEET and was successful therein. His rank in the merit list is 57 and there were in all 155 seats in all the institutions in the State of Haryana which were to be filled up from amongst the diploma holders. He avers that his result of the 6th semester examination held in June, 2000 has not been declared by the Director, Technical Education, Haryana without which he could not be admitted to the engineering course. He approached respondent No. 2 to declare his result but he did not receive any positive response and, therefore, he filed the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution for a mandamus directing respondent No. 2 to declare the result of the 6th semester examination so that the petitioner is able to seek admission to the engineering course under the Lateral Entry Scheme.

(3.) In response to the notice of motion issued by this Court the respondents have filed their reply. It is pleaded that the result of the 6th semester examination of the diploma course was declared on 18.8.2000 and even though the petitioner has been successful therein he does not become eligible to seek admission to the engineering course because he has not yet completed the diploma course the duration of which is 3-1/2 years consisting of 7 semesters. It is also averred that the petitioner took admission in the diploma course in the session 1997-98 when the duration of the course was 3-1/2 years consisting of 7 semesters. It is further averred that the 7th semester consists of in-plant training and the diploma is awarded by including the marks obtained by a candidate in this training after the 7th semester. It is contended that the duration of the course was inadvertently mentioned as 3 years in the prospectus issued for the session 1997-98 though actually it was 3-1/2 years.