AKSHAT CHAITANYA Vs. CHANAKYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, THE VICE CHANCELLOR, CHANAKYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, THE REGISTRAR, CHANAKYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY AND THE CONVENOR,

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Counsel for Chanakya National Law University. No one appears on behalf of Respondent No. 4. Notice of the pendency of the present proceeding was directed to be served on it through a private courier. The petitioner has filed a supplementary affidavit on 9.9.2008 showing proof of despatch by Blue Dart Express Ltd. as also the computerized tracking details confirming delivery on 29.8.2008 upon Respondent No. 4. The Chanakya National Law University has also filed an affidavit that intimation of pendency of the present case has been sent by it to Respondent No. 4 by Email on 10.1.2009. Respondent No. 4 is, therefore, now well aware of the present proceeding. It has chosen not to enter appearance to contest or oppose the claims of the petitioner. The Chanakya National Law University is one of the few Law Universities conducting a five year law course which selects and grants admission through a common law admission test conducted by Respondent No. 4.

(2.) The petitioner appeared at the entrance examination for the five year Session commencing from August, 2008. His all India rank was 1771 and his rank for admission to the Chanakya National Law University was 15 out of 31 candidates in the general category, the petitioner being a general category candidate. The next stage for admission required the petitioner to appear for counselling along with a demand draft of Rs. 81,000/ - and Rs. 5,000/ - for the purpose of uniform. The deposit for the uniform made by the petitioner was accepted by the Respondents while his demand draft prepared for Rs. 81,000/ - was refused. The petitioner was then informed by letter dated 4.7.2008, the call for counselling, that since he had passed his Higher Secondary Examination in compartment, meaning thereby that he had to repeat certain papers, he was not eligible for admission in Chanakya National Law University.

(3.) LEARNED Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the requirement in the prospectus was that the candidate should have secured aggregate not less than 45% of the total marks in the Higher Secondary School Examination. It is not in controversy that the petitioner fulfilled this requirement. The prospectus inviting applications did not provide for any condition or a limitation that those who had passed the Higher Secondary School Examination in compartment were not eligible for admission. The Respondents cannot subsequently impose any such condition. He relies upon a Bench decision of this Court reported in 2009 (1) PLJR 445 (Sangeeta Minki V/s. The State of Bihar and Ors.) It is submitted that the fact that the petitioner may have reappeared in certain papers at Higher Secondary level was no indication of his academic disqualification when he had shown his outstanding performance at All India Examination. Counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the Chanakya National Law University.