JUDGMENT 1. 1. This Special Appeal is directed against the order dated 17.1.98 made by the learned Single Judge in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3728/97. In brief, the facts leading to filing of this appeal are as follows : The appellant appeared in B.A. Part-I examination 1991 and secured 46 marks out of 200 marks in the paper of English Literature, 72 marks being minimum for passing. He appeared in B.A. Part-I (supplementary) examination, 1991 and passed the examination by securing 74 marks as against 72 minimum marks prescribed for clearing B.A. Part-I examination during 1991. He took up B.A. Part-II examination during 1991. He took up B.A. Part-II examination in 1993; again he failed in English Literature by securing 52 marks as against 72 minimum marks. The appellant appeared for B.A. Part-III examination in 1994 and cleared the same with the exception of paper of English Literature. He appeared in B.A. Part-III examination in 1995 as ex-student and was given the mark sheet of the aforesaid examination in Part II and Part III due papers in English Literature and was placed in passed grade in both the papers. On the basis of passing B.A. Part-III examination, he applied for admission in M.A. (Political Science). He took up M.A. (Previous) examination in 1996 and passed. Strangely, after a period of two years. the respondent No. 2 supplied the mark sheet of B.A. Part-III examination showing that the appellant failed in English Literature in the paper of B.A. Part-III examination, securing 41 marks as against 72 minimum marks prescribed for passing. It was a shock to the appellant that he was shown as failed in B.A. Part-III paper of English Literature and he approached the Principal of Rajkiya kala Mahavidyalaya, Alwar requesting him to intimate the marks of B.A. Part-III 1995 examination. The Principal certified that the appellant had secured 80 marks in B.A. Part-III 1995 examination. The appellant was also permitted to take M.A. (final) examination 1997, but the result of the M A (final) examination was withheld on the ground that he failed in B.A. Part-III English Literature paper. The Principal certified that the appellant had secured 80 marks in B.A. Part-III 1995 examination. The appellant was also permitted to take M.A. (final) examination 1997, but the result of the M A (final) examination was withheld on the ground that he failed in B.A. Part-III English Literature paper. Under these circumstances the appellant was forced to file the writ petition, seeking a writ of mandamus directing the respondent No. 2 to annul the mark sheet of B.A. Part III examination 1995 dated 1.2.1997 and modify the mark sheet of B.A. Part-Ill examination 1995 dated 22.7.95; with a further direction that the respondent No. 2 shall not prevent the appellant from appearing in M.A. (final) Political Science examination. 2. The respondent No. 2 University of Rajasthan resisted the claim of the appellant by filing reply. Learned Single Judge disposed of the said writ petition by the order under appeal. When none appeared for the parties, the so learned Single Judge held that the show cause notice had been issued earlier on the ground that the appellant was earlier declared passed, but this fact was unfounded according to the averments made by the appellant himself. Thus, aggrieved by the order of the learned Single Judge, the present appeal is filed. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant contended that for no fault of the appellant he cannot be penalised by not publishing the result of M.A. (Final) examination taken by him. The University had declared that the appellant had passed earlier and subsequently, mark sheet was-issued showing that he had failed. This pertains to the year 1995. On the basis of the earlier mark sheet issued, the appellant took admission for M.A. (Previous) Political Science in the respondent No. 2 University. He passed the M.A. (Previous) examination and thereafter took even the M.A. (Final) examination, but now the result is withheld. In short, according to the learned counsel for the appellant, the appellant cannot be made to suffer for no fault of him or for the negligence of the University. In support of his submissions, the learned counsel also cited the judgments of the Apex Court in the cases of Sanatan Gauda Berhampur University and others ( AIR 1990 S.C. 1075 ) and Shri Krishan v. The Kurukshetra University, Kurukshetra, AIR 1976 SC 376 . 4. Per contra, learned counsel representing the University argued in support of the order under appeal. 4. Per contra, learned counsel representing the University argued in support of the order under appeal. He submitted that due to a mistake the appellant was shown to have passed, in the first instance, in B.A. Part-III English Literature paper. After examining the records, mistake was corrected showing that the appellant had not passed B.A. Part III examination. Learned counsel added that offer was made to the appellant even to appear in B.A. Part-III English Literature paper, so that it would not affect his career in getting degree in M.A. 5. We have considered these submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. The facts, which are not in dispute are as follows : The appellant has appeared for M.A. (Final) examination in Political Science. His result is withheld. He has already passed M.A. (Previous) examination. The admission was given to the appellant on the basis that he to had passed B.A. Part-III examination. Subsequently, mistake was found and the mark sheet of the appellant was corrected showing that the appellant had failed in B.A. Part-III English Literature paper. 6. No doubt, it is on account of the mistake committed by the University a situation is brought about, but that itself cannot satisfy the requirement of passing B.A. Part-III examination in order to get admission in M.A. In other words, asking the respondent University to give a post graduate degree in M.A. to the appellant would not be correct unless the appellant passes the qualifying examination of B.A. In these circumstances, we think it just and appropriate that the respondent University should permit the appellant to take examination in B.A. Part-III English Literature paper and in the event of appellant passes in that paper, the result of M.A. (final) examination taken by the appellant, should be announced. We make it clear that the awarding of M.A. degree will depend upon the result of the examination of B.A. Part III English Literature paper and M.A. (final) examination. We also make it clear that the appellant be permitted to take B.A. Part-III examination in English Literature paper in the ensuing examination and in the event he will not be successful, he will be allowed to make further attempts, subject to the norms prescribed. The result of M.A. examination taken by the appellant shall be announced only after he successfully passes in B.A. Part-III examination in English Literature. 7. The result of M.A. examination taken by the appellant shall be announced only after he successfully passes in B.A. Part-III examination in English Literature. 7. The appeal is disposed of accordingly.Appeal disposed of accordingly. *******