BHAGAT RAM SHARMA Vs. H P UNIVERSITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant had joined law classes in the H. P. University. He obtained 191/300, 181/300 and 199/300 marks in the first three semesters. In the fourth semester he was declared successful with 233/400 marks. As he was not satisfied with the marks awarded to him in the Administrative Law and the Mercantile Law papers, therefore, he applied for re-valuation on 31-7-1974 in terms of the rule framed by the H. P. University on 31-7-1974 for the Administrative Law and Mercantile Law papers. He deposited the requisite fees for the same (Annexures B and C). After revaluation he was awarded 64 marks in the Administrative Law paper instead of 42 marks and 52 marks in the Mercantile Law paper instead of 56 marks. As a result of this revaluation he obtained 251 marks out of 400 marks in the 4th semester. The final marks-sheet (Annexure-D) was issued to him on 14-11-1974 and the re-valuation seems to have been done in the months of Aug./Sept. 1974. The appellant was thus awarded 822 marks out of 1300 marks in the four semesters and he also completed his examination in the first attempt.

(2.) The H. P. University had framed rules etc. for the award of scholarship, studentship and exhibitions as also for medals and prizes. A copy of the relevant ordinances/rules which were prevalent at that time is Annexure 'E' and is numbered as 16.14. According to this, the Executive Council of the University had decided to award a scholarship of Rs. 100/- per month to a student securing the highest order of merit and a gold medal was to be awarded to the student securing highest merit. After re-valuation the appellant was the highest in the order of merit and was, therefore, entitled to the scholarship as well as the gold medal. The appellant laid his claim for the award of scholarship and the gold medal, but his claim was denied by the respondents. He approached the Vice Chancellor of the University, but was informed that his representations were under consideration. The appellant later on came to know that the respondents' had illegally allowed/recommended the grant of scholarship to respondent No. 4 who had obtained lesser marks than the appellant.

(3.) The appellant alleged that the rules/ordinances for the giving of the scholarship as also the gold medal were amended by the Executive Council of the University in the meetings held on 31-10-1974 and 1-11-1974 but the respondents had no right to amend the ordinances/rules to the deteriment of the appellant and could not give any retrospective effect to the same. It was alleged that the actions of the respondents were mala fide and violative of the principles of natural justice as also Art.14 of the Constitution. The amendments made by the Executive Council of the H. P. University were challenged as being illegal and without any authority.