Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2005 DIGILAW 826 (PAT)

Ravi Kumar v. Patna University

2005-09-14

REKHA KUMARI

body2005
Judgment Rekha Kumari, J. 1. This is an application filed by the petitioner Ravi Kumar for issuing direction to the respondents to accept his examination form for B.A. Part III examination of Session 2004-05 and allow him to appear at the examination which is scheduled to be held from 11.4.2005. 2. It appears that by an interim order dated 8.4.2005 the petitioner, was allowed to appear at the examination subject to final decision of this writ petition. 3. The case of the petitioner is that he took admission in B.A. in Patna College, Patna, a constituent unit of Patna University in the Session 1999-2002. His subject was Modern History (Honours), Economics and Sociology. In 2002 he appeared in Part I examination commenced from 22.1.2001. He failed in Honours and composition but passed in subsidiary subjects. He could not appear in Honours and composition in 2000-01 and 2001-02 examinations on account of family problems. In 2002-03 he filled up form for both Part I and Part II. He again failed in Honours and composition in Part I examination and Honours paper in Part II examination. In 2003-04 he appeared in all the papers of Part I examination, including the subsidiary papers as he did not clear Part I examination in two attempts and also appeared in Part II (Hons.) paper as he had passed in subsidiary papers. He passed in both Part I and Part II examination. 4. The grievance of the petitioner is that when he went to submit his examination form alongwith the fees for Part III examination, the respondents refused to accept the same on the ground that he did not complete his part I in three consecutive Sessions, i.e. 2000-01, 2001-02 and 2002-03. 5. The respondents have filed a counter affidavit. Their stand is that as per provision of Clause 7.1 of the University Regulations relating to B.A. (three years degree course) the petitioner had to pass in all papers of Part I examination till 2003 so that eligibility of his promotion to Part II class might stand valid but as he failed to satisfy it he took readmission in Part I class during the Session 2003-04 for appearing in all papers in Part I examination of 2004 and was declared pass. The petitioner, hence, should have taken admission again in Part II class during the Session 2004-05. His examination of Part II 2003-04 having stood cancelled/invalid. The petitioner, hence, should have taken admission again in Part II class during the Session 2004-05. His examination of Part II 2003-04 having stood cancelled/invalid. The respondents have filed a copy of the Regulations. 6. After hearing both the sides, I think it would be pertinent to quote the provisions of 7.1 of the Examination Regulation of the University. It read thus : 7.1. There shall be University examination at the end of the first, the second and the third years of study to be known respectively as the B.A. (General/ Honours) Part I, Part II and Part III examination. No student shall be admitted to the B.A. (General) or B.A. (Honours) Part II class unless he has passed the B.A. (General) or B.A. (Honours) Part I examination and to the Part III class unless he has passed the Part II examination. Provided that if a student fails in, or fails to appear at, not more than two subjects at the B.A. (General/Honours) Part I/II examination he shall be promoted to the next higher class but he shall not be eligible for admission to the B.A. (General) or B.A. (Honours) Part III class unless he has passed the B.A. (General) or B.A. (Honours) Part I examination in the subject/subjects concerned. Provided further that this facility for appearing in such carry over subject/subjects shall be available to a student at not more than three consecutive examinations. Thus, according to the above provision, if a student fails in one or two subjects in Part I, he cannot be admitted in Part III unless he has cleared those papers and that he must clear those papers in three consecutive sessions. In this case the petitioner indeed failed in two papers in Part I and did not pass in those papers in three consecutive examination. Therefore, as per provisions of the Regulation he was not entitled to take admission in Part III, but it appears that in spite of the said provision he was admitted in Part III course and was allowed to complete his course. No fraud or misrepresentation has been attributed\against him in taking admission in Part III. 7 Hence, when he has now passed in all the papers in Part I and Part II examination on the ground of equity, the petitioner cannot be deprived from appearing at Part III examination, 8. In the result, this writ application is allowed. No fraud or misrepresentation has been attributed\against him in taking admission in Part III. 7 Hence, when he has now passed in all the papers in Part I and Part II examination on the ground of equity, the petitioner cannot be deprived from appearing at Part III examination, 8. In the result, this writ application is allowed. The petitioner is allowed to" appear at Part III examination.