Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 415 (KAR)

HAGE TUBIN S/O. HAGE APPO v. REGISTRAR (EVALUATION) BENGALURU UNIVERSITY, BENGALURU-560 001

2017-02-08

S.SUJATHA

body2017
ORDER : Petitioner is seeking for a direction in the nature of mandamus or any other writ, directing the respondent No.1/University to consider the letter dated 20.6.2016 vide Annexure-F addressed by the respondent No.2/College and representation dated 25.10.2016 vide Annexure-G addressed by the petitioner herein and to announce the results of the petitioner along with practicals and to issue marks card in respect of VIII, IX and X semesters of five years LLB Course bearing registration No.07WEL080 03. 2. The petitioner submits that he got himself admitted to five years LLB course in the respondent No.2/College. The petitioner has successfully completed 1st to 7th semesters. As far as VIII, IX and X semesters are concerned, the petitioner appeared but was unsuccessful in certain subjects in the examination held during May 2012, May 2013, May 2014, December 2014 and May 2015. The respondent No.1/University appreciating the fact that the petitioner is eligible to take up examination, issued admission card in favour of the petitioner in respect of 8th to 10th semesters. However, the results in respect of 8th to 10th semesters has not been announced. In such circumstances, the petitioner addressed a letter dated 20.6.2016 vide Annexure-F and gave a representation dated 25.10.2016 vide Annexure-G to the writ petition. It appears, the respondents have not taken any action on the said representations and the same are kept pending unattended for a long period. Due to the inaction on the part of the respondents in considering these representations and not announcing the results, it is contended by the petitioner that he is not able to complete the Law course and has been put to great hardship and injury. 3. However, the learned Counsel appearing for the respondent No.1/University placing reliance on the regulations governing five years LLB course of the Bangalore University would submit that no student carrying more than seven papers, from I semester to VII semesters shall be entitled for admission to the VIII semester or X Semester if the student carries more than seven papers from I Semester to IX Semester. Admittedly, the petitioner was carrying more than seven papers from I to V semesters put together while getting admission to the VIII semester and as such the petitioner is not entitled to the reliefs claimed in the writ petition. 4. Admittedly, the petitioner was carrying more than seven papers from I to V semesters put together while getting admission to the VIII semester and as such the petitioner is not entitled to the reliefs claimed in the writ petition. 4. The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner placing reliance on the Judgment of this Court in the case of ‘BALAJI.R v. THE REGISTRAR [EVALUATION] AND ANOTHER in W.P. No.52730/2014 [DD – 27.3.2015] submits that in similar set of facts, this Court directed the University to announce the results of the examination in respect of the subjects in which the petitioner therein had appeared. Hence, he seeks for similar direction to the respondent No.1/University to announce the results of the examination. 5. Indisputably, respondent No.1/University has issued admission card to the petitioner to take up the examination in respect of VIII to X semesters. This Court in the case of BALAJI.R[supra], while considering the similar set of facts wherein, in respect of 11 subjects of III to VI semesters, examinations notified in December 2013 and in respect of 5 subjects where the petitioner appeared for examination for the aforesaid semesters in May 2014, held that the petitioner being permitted to appear for examination in those subjects irrespective of the fact that they were all from III to V semesters, the University later on could not have declined to announce the results. The University is estopped from doing so. Applying the said principles of law enunciated by the coordinate Bench of this Court, it can be held that the respondent No.1/University after permitting the petitioner to appear for the examination in respect of VIII, IX and X semesters, having issued the admission card to the petitioner, now cannot contend that the admission of the petitioner to VIII and X semesters is contrary to the regulations of the University and as such the results of the petitioner cannot be announced. There cannot be discrimination among the students similarly placed. 6. Accordingly, the respondent No.1 is directed to announce the results of the examination in respect of subjects in which the petitioner has appeared in VIII, IX and X semesters along with the practicals and issue the marks card within a period of one month from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order. With the aforesaid observations, writ petition stands disposed of.