RAJINDER KUMAR SHARMA Vs. VICE CHANCELLOR PUNJAB UNIVERSITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two petitions (Civil Writs Nos. 2437 and 2806 of 1964) under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution have been referred to a larger Bench by my learned brother P. C. Pandit, J because the impugned orders are likely to affect the petitioners' careers inasmuch as they would be permanently declared unsuitable for the profession of Engineering in any College affiliated to the Punjabi University, patiala

(2.) FACTS as alleged in Civil Writ No. 2437 of 1964 may briefly be noticed Rajinder kumar Sharma petitioner claims to have joined the Thapar Engineering Institute, patiala in the year 1961 for the session 1961-62. It may be noted that at that time, this Institute was affiliated with the Punjab University. He passed the first year examination held in November 1962 from the Punjab University securing first division after clearing the compartment of Part I and regular examination of Part ii. The second year session had already started in July 1962. The petitioner was. however, after great difficulty, permitted to join the second year class in January, 1963 under the order of the Principal of the Institute. The petitioner appeared in the final examination of Part 1 of second year in April, 1963. This examination was also held by the Punjab University. For Part II, the petitioner was not issued any roll number by the Principal because it was alleged that he had failed in workshop practice sessional i. e. , internal assessment. According to the petitioner's averment, this sessional failure in workshop practice was due to the fact that the batch in which the petitioner was included, when joining the Institute, bad not been given any workshop practice in the summar vacation of 1962. The petitioner again joined second year in July, 1963 and sat for the final examination of second year in April, 1964. The result of this examination was declared in July, 1964 and the petitioner was declared to have failed in the examination because of his failure in workshop sessional. The petitioner got second division in Part I and got compartment ill two papers in Part II. He was however, allowed to join third year class provisionally on 15-7-1964. It may here be pointed out that according to the return or the written statement filed on behalf of the respondents, with the establishment of the Punjabi University at Paliala, the Thapar Engineering Institute at Patiala became affiliated with that University. The petitioner bad appeared in the final examination of Part I of second year with the Punjab University chandigarh in April, 1963 but he could not clear the said examination. In so far as the second Engineering Part II examination is concerned, this was conducted by the Punjabi University. Patiala, in April. 1963 and the petitioner along with two other candidates, namely Shri Jatindar Parkash and Shri Raj Kumar Gupta were granted special permission by the Syndicate of the Punjabi University. The principal of the Thapar Institute, respondent No 3 in this Court, submitted the admission forms of the petitioner and the other two candidates just mentioned and the petitioner was allotted roll number 49 which was forwarded by the Punjabi university to the Principal The Principal, however, did not issue the roll number slip to the petitioner because his sessional marks were deficient not only in workshop practice including practical training during summer vacation, but also in the following other five subjects.

(3.) TO revert to the writ petition, the petitioner alleges to have made a representation to the Principal that the petitioner could not attend the summer vacation session of 1963 for workshop practice because he was attending the survey camp during that period. The Principal, so proceeds the averment in the writ petition, recommended to the Punjab University that the petitioner should be given 37 marks out of 60 and 24 marks out of 40 making a total of 61 marks. The punjab University after receiving this recommendation, wrote back to the Principal that the petitioner having completed two years could not continue his studies any further and also struck off the petitioner's name from the rolls. On a further representation through the Principal to the Punjabi University, the former recommended reconsideration of the petitioner's case. The petitioner continued attending the College till 27/28-10-64. On 6-11-1964, the petitioner requested the principal to allow him to sit at the examination but the Principal expressed his inability to do so. It is in these circumstances and on the grounds just stated that the petitioner approached this Court on 9-11-1964 challenging the order of the punjabi University disallowing the petitioner to sit at the examination and also striking off his name from the rolls of the College, seeking permission by way of interim relief to sit at the compartment examination and also at the examination in part 1 of third year Engineering to be held on 11-11-1964. The impugned order has been described to be arbitrary, discriminatory, mala fide and without jurisdiction. It is pleaded that the petitioner having joined the second year in january, 1963, two years would be completed in January, 1965, with the result that Regulation No. 8 of the University could not stand in the petitioner's way. The petitioner had also not completed two years in the second year class for he had spent only three years in first and second year classes. The petitioner's academic year began only in July, 1963 when he joined the second year. It has further been averred that before striking off the petitioner's name from the rolls, no notice or opportunity was given to him to explain the position and to show cause against the removal of his name. This according to the petitioner, is violative of the recognised rules of natural justice.