Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2009 DIGILAW 530 (MP)

RAM BHUSHAN SHUKLA v. STATE OF M P

2009-04-22

DIPAK MISRA, R.K.GUPTA

body2009
Judgment ( 1. ) THE present petition is filed by the petitioner seeking following reliefs:-"i. That, the Honble Court may be pleased to call for the entire record including the question paper/ answer book and signature sheet of the petitioner having Roll no. 582031. ii. That, the respondents be directed to allow the petitioner as a special candidate and for appearing him in a fresh examination of PAT for the current Session 2007-08 immediately. iii. That, in alternative, the respondents be directed to compensate the petitioner pecuniary for the huge amount incurred by him during the preparation of the pat examination and loss of valuable academic session. iv. Any other relief which this honble Court deems fit and proper may kindly be granted. " ( 2. ) THE facts leading to the present case are that Madhya pradesh Professional Examination Board, Bhopal conducted common Entrance Test with regard to admissions in the pre Agriculture Test for the year 2007-08. The necessary form was also submitted by the petitioner in that regard. It is the case of the petitioner that while issuing the admission card, the petitioner was wrongly issued the admit card of pre Engineering Test in place of Pre Agriculture Test. As a consequence of the same, the petitioner could not get admission in the subject on which he submitted his form. ( 3. ) THE respondent No. 1 in the return has stated that as a matter of fact, Science and Maths are common for all the three examinations. However, it was open to candidates to choose the subjects which are provided in column no. 12 of omr application. The petitioner was required to opt only one subject but in his OMR application, he has darkened the ovals for science agriculture and agriculture 1,2 3 and on account of the said entries, it was difficult to decide as to which subject he had chosen for the examination and, therefore, he was given the test admit card for Science and maths which was common for P. E. T. , P. A. T. and Pharmacy. ( 4. ) ON the basis of the aforesaid, the question in the present case is that if the petitioner had darkened the ovals of science agriculture and agriculture 1, 2 and 3 which was basically wrong then it was for the respondent no. ( 4. ) ON the basis of the aforesaid, the question in the present case is that if the petitioner had darkened the ovals of science agriculture and agriculture 1, 2 and 3 which was basically wrong then it was for the respondent no. 1 either to have rejected the form or should have sought a clarification from the petitioner. There is nothing on record indicating that any such clarification was sought from the petitioner. Had such clarification sought, the mistake would not have been occurred. ( 5. ) IN the present case, we have also noticed Jawaharlal nehru Krishi Vishwavidyalaya, Jabalpur where the admissions are to be made after the entrance test. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the University Shri P. N dubey submitted that though the petitioner was eligible for the admission but no seat is presently vacant and, therefore, it is very difficult for the University to give admission to the petitioner. ( 6. ) ON the basis of the same, we do not find any fault on the part of the petitioner. On the contrary, the fault seems to be of the respondent no. 1 as the respondent no. 1 was to sought a clarification from the petitioner as to in which subject he intended to appear. If the respondent No. 1 would have been vigilant then the situation with regard to the present status would not have arisen. ( 7. ) IN view of the aforesaid, the only direction which can be given to the respondents is that in the next session, the petitioner be given admission in the Pre Agriculture Test. ( 8. ) ACCORDINGLY, the writ petition stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.