SURENDRA KUMAR MITTAL Vs. UNIVERSITY OF RAJPUTANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a petition under Art 226 of the Constitution of India.

(2.) THE petitioner, Surendra Kumar Mittal, passed the Hindi Honours (Prabhakar) Examination of the* Punjab University in the year 1950, and thereafter appeared in two subjects, English and Politics, separately, and obtained a provisional certificate of the said University that he had passed the B A. examination of the Punjab University help in April, 1954, under Regulation 7-D. and was eligible for degree. THE petitioner obtained admission to the MA. (previous) class in Hindi of the Maharaja's College affiliated to the Rajputana University, and wanted admission to the L. L. B (pervious) class in the University Law College. THE Principal of the Law College declined to admit him on the ground that he was not qualified for admission. THE petitioner contended that he had passed the degree examination of the Punjab University which was recognised as equivalent to the corresponding examination of the Rajputana University,and under the rules of the University was qualified for admission to the L. L. B. previous class. He approached the Registrar of the University but the view of the Principal were upheld. It was prayed that the respondents be directed to admit the petitioner to the L. L. B. previous class of the University Law College. THE University of Rajputana the Registrar of the University, and the Principal of the University Law College were made respondents.

(3.) ON behalf of the University it is urged that there is a distinction between a degree examination of the Punjab University which is recognised as equivalent to the degree examination of the Rajputana University, and an examination, though not a degree examination, qualifies a candidate for obtaining a degree of the Punjab University. In our opinion the distinction, though fine, Is nevertheless real. This distinction is emphasised by the ordinance for admission of students to the Faculty of Law when it is said in respect of a degree of an Indian University that such degree should be one 'recognised for the purpose by the Syndicate and with full course prescribed for the degree. ' The full course prescribed for the degree of Bachelor of Arts by the Punjab University, as mentioned above, is English as compulsory subject, and any two other subjects. The candidate in the present case has passed in English and Political Science but not in the third subject prescribed for B. A. examination. He has no doubt passed the Prabhakar examination in Hindi but it is nowhere laid down in the Calendar of the Punjab University that the passing of Prabhakar Examination is equivalent to the passing in Hindi of the B. A. examination. It may be mentioned that as regards an oriental classical language the regulations provide that the passing of high proficiency examination in Sanskrit, Arabic, or Honours in Persian will exempt the candidate from passing in that language the examination of the Bachelor of Arts and the marks obtained by him shall be taken to be the marks obtained at the Bachelor of Arts examination. The regulations of the Punjab University thus make a distinction between the case of passing an examination in a classical oriental language and passing an examination in a modern Indian language. The petitioner, therefore, has not taken the degree of the Punjab University with full course prescribed for the degree.