SHANTI GOPAL KARAN & ORS. Vs. KOLHAN UNIVERSITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners' claim to have been admitted in a regular manner in B.Ed. Course for the Sessions 2012 -13 in the Baharagora College under Kolhan University. They came before this Court with a prayer to permit them to appear in the Examination scheduled to commence from 3rd October, 2012 for B.Ed. Examination, 2012 or in the alternative to convene special examination. The Respondents -Registrar of the Kolkhan University filed an affidavit on 15th March, 2013. The Principal of the college, namely, Surendra Prasad Singh, respondent no. 4 filed an affidavit on 8th May, 2013. The stand of the Respondent -University as well as Principal through their affidavits was that these petitioners are the beneficiaries of irregular admission undertaken in B.Ed. Course much after the conclusion of the admission process by September, 2011 by allowing these petitioners to be admitted on 30th November, 2011 by the then Principal of the said college, Dr. K.N. Upadhyay.

(2.) THESE matters came to the notice of the University because of agitation being carried out by the students and were inquired into. On the last occasion i.e. on 21st June, 2013, this Court directed the respondents to bring on record the copy of the inquiry report about which reference has been made in the affidavit filed by respondent no. 4 on 8th May, 2013 vide Annexures -H & I respectively. The respondent no. 4 has subsequently filed another supplementary counter affidavit on 8th July, 2013 which however does not contain any report but are some receipts of admission of some of the petitioners, the attendance -sheet dated 1st December, 2011 and 9/15.7.2013 January, 2012 of the petitioners as well as certain photographs and F.I.Rs. which are related to certain admission irregular taken in the year 2009.

(3.) IN these circumstances, the affidavits and the materials on record are not only disputed by the rival parties but also are not conclusive to enable the Court to draw any inference one way or other. Strangely, the respondents have not brought on record the report of inquiry said to have been conducted by a team constituted by the University comprising of 4 persons initially and later on again by a team of 8 persons including Registrar, Pro -Vice -Chancellor of the University including members of the Syndicate with Proctor and the Deputy Registrar. In order to enable the Court to come to a definite conclusion one way or the other in respect of the controversies raised, therefore, it is necessary to direct the Vice Chancellor of Kolhan University to submit a detailed inquiry report, if any, which has been prepared by the Enquiry Committee constituted for the said purpose by the University as would appear from the Annexures -'A' & 'C' to the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the Registrar of the University.