Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2025 DIGILAW 576 (HP)

Muskan v. State of Himachal Pradesh

2025-04-01

AJAY MOHAN GOEL

body2025
JUDGMENT : Ajay Mohan Goel, J. By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has, inter alia, prayed for the following reliefs:- “i) By issuing appropriate writ, order, or direction, direct the respondent university to conduct the B.Sc. 3 rd years examination of the petitioner as re-appear instead of late college capacity and declare the results without further delay. ii) That the respondent university, be directed to give two chances of re-appear to the petitioner as prescribed by the First Ordinance of University’s Clause 9.9: iii) That the respondent University, be directed to allow the petitioner in 3 rd year re-appear examination without losing another academic year.” 2. When the case was listed on 27.03.2025, the following order was passed by the Court:- “The grievance of the petitioner is that the respondent-University is not permitting her to take the examination in the subject of Mathematics, in which she had scored compartment when she actually appeared in the examination in 2022-23 session. Her case is that she was admitted in B.Sc Course in the Academic Session 2020-21. She appeared in the 1 st year examination in the year 2021 and thereafter in 2 nd year examination in the year 2022. In the said examination, she was declared as a failed student. As she was not satisfied with the result she applied for re-evaluation of her answer-sheet. Simultaneously, she was also admitted in the 3 rd year of the Graduation Course. The result of re-evaluation was declared on 17.01.2023, in which she was declared pass in all the subjects of 2 nd year examination. Though in the interregnum she had appeared in the final year examination also, but University withheld her result on the ground that the petitioner had not filled up the examination form. After the result of the re- evaluation was declared, the petitioner approached this Court by way of a writ petition, seeking a direction to the respondent-University to declare her result of the 3 rd year. Pursuant to the order passed by this Court, the same was done by the University. In the result so declared of the 3 rd year, the petitioner was shown to have compartment in one subject. Pursuant to the order passed by this Court, the same was done by the University. In the result so declared of the 3 rd year, the petitioner was shown to have compartment in one subject. The contention of the petitioner is that as a regular student gets two attempts to clear the compartment exam, she is being discriminated as she is not being given two attempts by the University to pass the exam in the subject to Mathematics, in which she had got compartment. Learned counsel for the respondent-University submits that after the declaration of the final year result of the petitioner, one chance was given to the petitioner in the month of October, 2024, to re-appear in the subject of Mathematics, but she did not appear. He submits that as this was the last opportunity granted to the petitioner, therefore, now nothing can be done and she will have to appear in all the examination of 3 rd year as a late college student. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the considered view that stand which is being taken by the University is nothing but harsh. Here, whatever happened in the interregnum i.e. between the years 2022 and 2023 which led to the non- declaration of the result of the petitioner, was on account of the late declaration of the re-evaluation result of 2 nd year exam of the petitioner by the respondent-University. Accordingly, this Court is of the considered view that the respondent-University cannot take advantage of its own wrongs. Delay, if any, in the declaration of the final year result is totally attributable to the University and had that not been so then this Court in the earlier petition would not have directed the University to declare the result. In this circumstances, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioner has a right to be given atleast two chances to appear in the exam in the subject in which she had got compartment. Out of the said two attempts, because one she did not avail in the month of October, 2024, therefore, minimum that is required on the part of the University is that one more opportunity be granted to the petitioner to sit in the compartment examination of the subject concerned. Out of the said two attempts, because one she did not avail in the month of October, 2024, therefore, minimum that is required on the part of the University is that one more opportunity be granted to the petitioner to sit in the compartment examination of the subject concerned. Learned counsel for the respondent-University is directed to have specific instructions in this regard as to why the University cannot give one opportunity to the petitioner in the peculiar facts of the case. Let positive instructions in this regard be obtained by the learned counsel on the next date of hearing. List on 01.04.2025, on which date the case shall be taken up as first case.” 3. In the morning hours, when the case was taken up today, learned counsel for the University, handed over a copy of instruction received from Registrar, H.P. University, para No.2 whereof reads as under:- “2. That it is submitted that the result of B. Sc. 3rd year of the petitioner was declared on 08.08.2024 on the directions issued by the Hon'ble High Court of H.P. and the petitioner got Compartment in B.Sc. 3rd year in Maths-313 in the examinations held in March-April, 2023 and two chances of the petitioner to clear her compartment got exhausted/ elapsed in September, 2023 & April-2024 respectively, during the litigation period when her result with held due to fail status of her lower class result i.e. B.Sc 2nd year. As per Clause -6 of the examination rules, it has been clearly stipulated as under :- He/she will have two chances (one at the supplementary stage and one at the annual stage available to him/her to clear his/her compartment in subjects/papers. The relevant rules have already been annexed with the reply to writ petition as Annexure R-2.” 4. After perusal of the instructions, the Court called upon the learned counsel for the University to ask the Vice Chancellor and Registrar of the University to join the proceedings because somehow this Court was not able to reconcile with the fact as to how the chance of a student whose result was declared on 08.09.2024, stood exhausted in the month of September, 2023. 5. Mr. 5. Mr. Sat Prakash Bansal, Vice Chancellor of the University has apprised the Court that today itself, the facts of the case were brought to his notice and taking into consideration holistically, the issue involved therein, in exercise of the powers vested in Executive Council, the petitioner shall be given a special chance to appear in the forthcoming Mathematics examination (Code:- Math-313) as a re-appear candidate, which is stated to be scheduled on 21.04.2025. He further submitted that he is also ensuring that these kind of instances do not occur in future so that such inconvenience is not caused to the students. 6. In the light of the statement so made by the Vice Chancellor of the respondent-University, these proceedings are closed, with the direction that let a special chance be given to the petitioner to re-appear in the forthcoming examination of Mathematics on the date already fixed and it be ensured that such situations do not arise in future which lead the students to approach the Courts. 7. With these observations, this writ petition is disposed of. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, also stand disposed of accordingly.