HARPREET SINGH BAWA Vs. GURU NANAK DEV UNIVERSITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this petition, the petitioner has prayed for issuance of a direction to the respondent to admit him in LL.B. (3 years Course) (hereinafter referred to as the Course) in Gum Nanak Dev University, Amritsar, respondent No. 1 (hereinafter referred to as the University).

(2.) THE petitioner appeared in Entrance Test for the Course conducted by the University on 11.7.2000 provisionally because final result of the qualifying examination i.e. B. Com. (hereinafter referred to as 'the Qualifying Examination') had not yet been declared by the Delhi University. In the result published in the Daily Ajit (Punjabi)' on 18.7.2000, he was declared successful and placed at serial No. 22 in the merit list. There were 50 seats in the Course. In terms of the Regulations contained in the Prospectus, Law Entrance Test (2000 -2001) issued by the Faculty of Law of the University, the petitioner was required to pro -duce the final result of the Qualifying Examination of B.Com. at the time of interview held on 20.7.2000. He could not produce the same and for that reason was not given admission in the Course. The result of the Qualifying Examination of the petitioner was declared on 28.7.2000. He thereafter approached the Registrar of the University for allotment of seat in the said Course which was vacated on 9.8.2000 by Richa Srivastava, who had secured 6th position in the order of merit in the Law Entrance Examination, but without any result. It has further been averred by the petitioner that he was entitled to seek admission in the Course on payment of late fee in terms of provisions contained in Ordinance 5 of Chapter III(i) of the University Calendar 1999, Volume 111, but his prayer in this regard was also defined by the University. Termining the action of the respondents as illegal, a challenge has been made to the provisions contained in Clause (2) of Part E of the Prospectus on the ground that the same are ultra vires of the provisions of Ordinance 6 ibid.

(3.) WE have heard Mr. R.T.P.S. Tulsi, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. P.S. Patwalia, learned counsel for the respondents and have gone through the records of the writ petition.