Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2006 DIGILAW 1333 (RAJ)

The Bikaner University v. Vidhi Mahavidhyalaya

2006-04-25

R.P.VYAS

body2006
Judgment 1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties. 2. Brief history of case shows that the State Government has given no objection to the respondent college to start a 3 years LL.B degree course. In pursuance of the order, admissions were given to students to Academic Session 2004-2005. On 212.2004 the appellant University of Bikaner, informed the respondent college that they had admitted students without obtaining affiliation of the course with the University. Later on their application for affiliation was considered and it was communicated that it is not possible to accord affiliation to the College for the Session 2004-2005. In pursuance of the aforesaid communication from the University dated 17.02.2005 the college authorities informed the students that college has received communication about the cancellation of affiliation, therefore, it is not possible to hold examination of LL.B course by the college. 3. This led to filing of S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1674/2005 on 16.03.2005. 4. After a short notice, on 01.04.2005 learned Single Judge passed the ad interim order, after hearing the Counsel for the parties that “the Respondent No. 2 Bikaner University shall permit the students of the Respondent No. 3 Vidhi Mahavidhyala, Sangaria to appear in the examinations going to be held on 04.04.2005. Necessary arrangements may be made forthwith by the Respondent No. 2. However, the result of these students will be declared with the permission of this Court and the examination shall be provisional subject to the decision of the writ petition.” 5. The application for recalling and vacating interim order was also rejected by the learned Single Judge on 13.04.2005 after hearing all parties. It was also made clear while rejecting application for vacating interim order that none of students have any claim merely, on the basis of their appearance at examination under the permission of the Court. 6. In pursuance of the aforesaid directions, Examination of First Year LL.B was conducted and students of respondent College participated in the said examination. 7. The aforesaid interim order became final and was not challenged by way of appeal. 8. Thereafter an application was moved by the petitioner on 07.09.2005 for seeking direction that they may be allowed to take the examination of paper No. 7 and application was also moved for declaring the result of LL.B Ist year. 9. That application came to be listed for orders on 212.2005. 8. Thereafter an application was moved by the petitioner on 07.09.2005 for seeking direction that they may be allowed to take the examination of paper No. 7 and application was also moved for declaring the result of LL.B Ist year. 9. That application came to be listed for orders on 212.2005. After detailed hearing learned Single Judge directed that the result of LL.B First year be declared provisionally and the appellant university was further directed that the eligible students shall fill in the requisite examination forms within a week thereafter, and the same shall be forwarded immediately by the college to the university alongwith the amount of necessary fees which would be received alongwith examination forms. The students shall be enclosing the amount of necessary fees and charges in the form of Demand Draft drawn directly in the name of the university. On scrutiny of the examination forms, the University may permit such students to take examination of Second Year of LL.B course, subject to the stipulation that if in the meantime, any order is passed in the writ petition that would obviously govern the rights of the parties. Writ petition was ordered to be listed on 30.01.2006. 10. The order dated 212.2005 was subjected to appeal on 12.01.2006 and the appeal was admitted on 18.01.2006. The order dated 212.2005 was ordered to be stayed while noticing the contention of the learned Counsel for the university, that it is not a cancellation of affiliation once granted but is a case of non grant of affiliation, ever. On 01.03.2006 the Respondent No. 1 moved an application for vacating the interim order dated 18.01.2006. Said application was listed for orders on 20.03.2006 when learned Counsel for appellant wanted time to file reply to application which was granted. Now the same has come for orders on the application for interim relief and for vacating the interim relief granted on 18.01.2006. 11. It is informed by the learned Counsel for the appellant that meanwhile during operation of the interim order passed on 18.01.2006, the examinations of Second Year LL.B have been completed, but because of the interim order passed in this appeal the petitioners have not been able to take examination of LL.B II year. 12. This fact is not in dispute. It is informed by the learned Counsel for the appellant that meanwhile during operation of the interim order passed on 18.01.2006, the examinations of Second Year LL.B have been completed, but because of the interim order passed in this appeal the petitioners have not been able to take examination of LL.B II year. 12. This fact is not in dispute. In the aforesaid circumstances, unless fresh order directing appellant to hold supplementary IInd Year Examination for the respondent petitioner, order under appeal cannot be given effect to now. 13. We are of the opinion, at this juncture, it would not be proper to direct the appellant university to hold fresh examination before determination of the controversy as passing of such direction would further create greater difficulties for respondents petitioners at later stage in case the petitioner fails. 14. In the circumstances best course open is to request to the Honble Single Judge to hear the writ petition on merit at the admission stage for which suitable date may be fixed by the learned Single Judge on being request made by the learned Counsel and the writ petition may be disposed of as early as possible so that party may be able to seek and persue their courses for next academic session to start with certainty. Subject to the aforesaid observation, this appeal is disposed of , in terms of order passed on 20.03.2006.