JUDGMENT Hon’ble Alok Singh, J. (Oral) Counter affidavit handed over by the respondents in the Court is taken on record. 2. Both these writ petitions are inter-connected involving identical questions of facts and law, therefore, these writ petitions are taken up together and are being disposed of by this common judgment. 3. For the sake of brevity, facts of writ petition No. 2071 of 2014 are taken into consideration. 4. Petitioner was admitted in B.Tech (Agriculture Engineering) Degree Programme of the University in first semester 2012-13; petitioner failed to secure GPA 5 out of 10 at the end of the 1st semester 2012-13, therefore, he was placed on probation in 2nd semester of the same year 2012-13; in the 2nd semester too, petitioner was not able to secure required CGPA 5 out of 10, therefore, petitioner was dropped from the University. Petitioner was re-admitted to re-appear in the first semester and second semester examination in the year 2013-14. Petitioner re-appeared in 2013-14 1st and IInd Semester examination, however, could secure only 5.710 marks in first semester re-examination and 6.291 marks in second semester re-examination. Petitioner was declared failed on the ground that since petitioner was allowed to re-appear in the first semester and second semester examination, therefore, as per Regulation 44(b), he had to secure 6 CGPA out of 10. Feeling aggrieved, petitioner has approached this Court by way of writ petition. 5. I have heard Mr. Sharad Sharma, Senior Advocate assisted by Ms. Vandana Singh and Mr. S.K. Mandal, Advocates for the petitioners and Mr. Rajendra Dobhal, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. G.D. Joshi, Advocate for the respondents and have carefully perused the record. 6. As per Regulation 31, available as annexure No. 2, students securing CGPA 5 out of 10 shall be declared pass, however, as per Regulation 44 (b), annexure No.6 to the writ petition, if student is allowed to re-appear in the examination, he has to secure 6 CGPA out of 10 to declare pass. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently argued that Regulation 44 (b) is unreasonable and arbitrary, therefore, same is in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India, therefore, same should be quashed. 8. 7. Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently argued that Regulation 44 (b) is unreasonable and arbitrary, therefore, same is in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India, therefore, same should be quashed. 8. Learned counsel for the petitioners have placed reliance on the minutes of meeting of Committee constituted by the BOFT dated 16.12.2013 wherein Committee has opined that since, student can be declared pass having obtained 5 CGPA in first attempt, thus, there is no reason to ask the same student to obtain 6 CGPA in the re-examination. Such student should be declared pass on securing 5 CGPA in re-examination too. 9. Mr. Rajendra Dobhal, learned Senior Counsel, appearing for the University, has vehemently argued that alleged outcome of the meeting held on 16.12.2013 has not been accepted so far and no amendment has been carried out in Regulation 44 (b), therefore, University is competent to place reliance on Academic Regulation 44 (b) as stand as on day. Learned counsel for the respondents further contends that as per the Academic Regulation 44(b), since petitioner could not secure 6 CGPA in re-examination, he was rightly declared failed. 10. In my considered opinion, resolution of the meeting of Committee dated 16.12.2013 seems to be most appropriate and justified. If a student is declared pass having secured CGPA 5 out of 10 in 1st and IInd semester in the first attempt as to why he be not declared pass having secured CGPA in both the semesters re-examination. University cannot discriminate between 1st attempt student and IInd attempt (Re-examination) student. There seems to be no rationality behind such discrimination. Consequently, Regulation 44 (b) is set aside being in violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. 11. University is directed to carry out amendment in the Academic Regulation 44 as per the minutes of meeting held on 16.12.2013 passed by the Committee. 12. As revealed from annexure No.1, petitioner was able to secure CGPA 5.816 out of 10 in first semester and IInd semester re-examination, therefore, petitioner ought to have been declared pass in accordance with Regulation 31 of the Academic Regulation as well as in the light of Resolution dated 16.12.2013 passed by the Committee. 13. In the result, writ petitions are allowed. Petitioners are declared pass and University is directed to grant admission to the petitioners in third semester. 14. No cost.