SHAYANA KANOTRA Vs. GURU NANAK DEV UNIVERSITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Written statement filed in court today is taken on record.

(2.) The petitioner has a grievance about the refusal to condone the absence in requisite lectures in her MBA course that arose on account of an accident requiring her bed rest for six weeks that ultimately resulted in declining permission to take the exams. The counsel for the petitioner would state that the power to condone always existed with the Vice Chancellor and the provision relating to attendance and condonation, if they existed setting out any percentage as a minimum in the University Calendar or statue, it should be only taken as directory and not an inviolable mandate even in deserving situation. The petitioner would rely on a judgment of this Court in Salil Trikha Versus Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar, and another, 2010 3 SLR 164that dealt with the case of a student in LLB class who had a problem relating to his attendance which required a minimum to be 66% in the aggregate and invoking the provision of the University ordinance and Bar Council Ruling providing for power of the Dean or the Principal to condone attendance short of the requisite 66%, the Court held that the power must be exercised to the benefit of the student. The court was considering the medical certificate produced that recommended medical leave for a period of 26 days and when the student was found short by 16 lectures from the minimum required, the Court directed the benefit of condonation to the student.

(3.) In this case, there is minimum requirement was 75% and the University Calendar provided for further period of condonation upto 10% of the lectures in the particular subject, if the Board recommended such a course and additional 5%, if the Vice Chancellor was of the view that such condonation was essential. In all, therefore, the condonation of attendance that was possible was upto 40%. The University brings out the schedule of the requisite number of lectures to be attended in the six subjects which a candidate was required to take in the second semester, an actual number of lectures which she attended and the relaxation that would be permissible upto the maximum extent. The Schedule is re-produced as under:- <FRM>JUDGEMENT_32_LAWS(P&H)9_2014_1.html</FRM>