RAMAN KUMAR Vs. PANJAB UNIVERSITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RAMAN Kumar and Vikas Kalucha, petitioners, have filed the present writ petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents 1 and 2 to declare that the petitioners have passed in the 4th year BAMS Examination. The petitioners have further prayed that a writ in the nature of certiorari be issued quashing the orders, Annexures P -3, P -9 and P -10.

(2.) THE case set up by the petitioners is that they joined the institute -respondent No. 2 for doing BAMS Degree Course in the month of October, 1988. The course was of six years duration One year for pre -Ayurveda and S years for the Degree Course. In the year 1991, respondent No, 2 was provisionally affiliated with Punjab University and respondent No. 1 allowed the College to follow the regulations of Punjabi University, Patiala, as no regulations were framed by it for the said Degree Course. Respondent No. 1 introduced professionally; i.e. two terms of 1 -1/2 years each, and third term of two years duration. The professional system was also started in the College affiliated to the Punjab State Faculty from the year 1992. Respondent No. I vide its meeting held on 13.3.1993 decided to allow the students enrolled up to 1991 to continue with the annual system and Syllabi/Regulations. The case set up by the petitioners further is that on 28.8.1998, they passed all the five years of BAMS Degree Course except one paper -B of Parsooti Tantra (Gynae) pertaining to the 4th year. Since the petitioners could not clear the said paper of the 4th year, their result was declared as cancelled. The petitioners allege that they have already cleared the BAMS Degree Course except single Paper -B of Parsooti Tantra (Gynae), therefore, for the sake of their academic career, they requested the authorities to grant them a mercy chance. In September, 1998, the request of the petitioners was rejected on the ground that the same was not covered under the existing rules. Now, the case set up by the petitioners is that after great efforts they came to know the detail marks of the 4th year and if the University is called upon to give the grace marks as per Regulation 15(i) of the Punjabi University Patiala Calendar Volume II, Annexure P -2, they will become successful in the entire course. They have been deprived of these grace marks by the University as a result of which they are suffering irreparable loss to their academic career. In short, the case set up by the petitioners is that they are entitled to the benefit of Regulation 15(i).

(3.) IT was further the stand of the University that the case of the petitioners fell in clauses (ii) and (iii) of Regulation 15 and, as such, they were not eligible to take the advantage of clause 15(i), which is being relied upon by the petitioners.