PARUL AGARWAL Vs. UNIVERSITY OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The allegations against the Private Educational Institutions in the instant writ petitions are that theironly aim is to makemoney, driving a hard bargain, exploiting eagerness to acquire a professional degree which would be a passport for employment in our country rempant with unemployment. The factsof the writpetitions remind me a popular couplet of SanskritPoet BHARTHARI HARI, who in his 'NEETI SHATAKAM, consisting of the hundred couplets, wrote (English translation) -

(2.) Common questions that ariseforconsideration in all these four writ petitions are : (i)Whether after allowing the candidate to take the examination rightly or wrongly, the University can subsequently withdraw hiscandidature and refused his admission? (ii)Whether compelling the University tooverlook the ineligibility of the candidate inview of the principles of promissory estoppel, will be subversive of academic discipline leading to serious impasse in academic life?

(3.) Contextual facts depict that the petitioner Miss Parual Agarwal while studying inIII Year B.A. had occasion to see anadvertisement issued by the University ofRajasthan for admission in the course of Master of Business Administration (M.B.A.). All thosecandidates who were studying in III Year B.A. and likely to appear in the final examination of B.A. III Year were also eligible for submitting applications for M.B.A. For the purpose of admission to M.B.A., Mohan Lal SukhadiaUniversity of Udaipur in January, 1999 conducted Rajasthan Management Aptitude Test (RMAT), Parul Agarwal appeared in the test and was declared successful. In Feb. 1999 she also qualified the interview held in Poddar Institute of Management Jaipur. She applied for admission in India International Institute of Management(IIIM) and was given admisison in M.B.A. Part I against the paidseat under NRI quota aftercharging from her Rs. 1.25 lakhs for tution fees and other expenses for one year. The resultof the III Year B.A. examination was not declared before commencement of the academic session of M.B.A. Part I as such she joined IIIM as a regular student in anticipation of the result. In the month of August, 1999 the result of III Year B.A. Examination was declared. Though she was declared successful in theexamination yet she was not satisfied with the marks allotted to her and she applied for revaluation. The result of revaluation was notdeclared till July 2000. In the meanwhile the examinations for M.B.A. Part I were declared to be held from 4/07/2000. The IIIM forwarded the enrolment form to the University of Rajasthan . The University permitted Parul Agarwal provisionally to appear in M.B.A. Part I examination and allotted her Roll No. 2176 withenrolment No. 96/45057. Parul Agarwal appeared in the examinations of M.B.A. Part I. Nearing the completion of examination she received the revaluation Marks sheet of III Year B.A. which demonstrated that she obtained 48.6% marks. As required by the syllabus of MBA Parul Agarwal attended summer training and submitted her project report on 2/11/2000. The result of M.B.A. Part I was declared in December 2000 and published in the news papers but the result of the petitioner was withheld. The IIIM permitted Parul Agarwal to continue her study in II Year M.B.A. despite the fact that her result of M.B.A. Part I was withheld. However Parul Agarwal did not pay IIIM the fee for admission in II Year M.B.A. The examinations of M.B.A. Part I were scheduled to commence from 20/06/2001 but Parul Agarwal was not permitted to appear in the said examination. Under these circumstances Parul Agarwal has instituted the instant writ petition seeking direction to allow her to appear in II Year M.B.A.examination and to declare her result of M.B.A. Part I.