JAI CHAND RAI Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB
HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH
JAI CHAND RAI
STATE OF PUNJAB
Click here to view full judgement.
Ramabhadran, J. -
(1.) This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution and it has been made under the following circumstances. The petitioner, Jai Chand Rai, is a clerk employed in the Subordinate Judge's Court, Hissar, Punjab (I). On 7-7-1953, the petitioner submitted his admission form for the Intermediate Examination of the Punjab University, which was to be held on 5-9-1953. He offered Urdu as one of the elective subjects. On 8-8-1953, the petitioner was informed by the respondent that, according to the rules of the University, he could not offer Urdu as an elective subject. He was asked to offer some other subject admissible under the rules. Accordingly, the petitioner offered Hindi elective instead of Urdu elective and Urdu optional instead of Hindi optional. The petitioner, in due course, appeared at the examination. When the results were announced, he found that he had failed in two subjects, namely English and Hindi. The petitioner's contention is that if he had not offered Hindi elec-tive in place of Urdu elective, he would have come out successful, the deficiency of two marks in English being condonable under the rules. Thereafterwards, the petitioner made representations to the University authorities, praying that he might be deemed to nave passed in four subjects and allowed to appear in Hindi elective in the examination to be held in April 1954. The representation was rejected. Hence, the present petition, wherein the petitioner points out that, according to the rules of the University, he could have offered Persian, Arabic, French or German, but not Urdu, as an elective subject, whereas European, Anglo-Indian and women candidates could have offered Urdu elective. It is, therefore, contended that the University has made a discrimination on the basis of sex, race and place of birth and thereby infringed the provisions of Article 15(1) of the Constitution. Petitioner further contends that Urdu is a language spoken all over the Punjab and under Article 29(1) of the Constitution, it must be conserved.
(2.) It was further alleged that the petitioner has been put to serious loss by the action of the respondent in debarring him from offering Urdu elective. But for this prohibition, petitioner's case is that he would have been successful in the Intermediate Examination and could have' appeared for the B.A. Examination in April 1955. Accordingly, the reliefs asked for are: (a) that he be declared to have been successful in the Intermediate Examination held in September 1953 and be permitted to sit in the B.A. Examination due to be held in April 1955. (b) The petitioner be awarded compensation at the rate of Rs. 300/-p.m. from 1-9-1954 till 15-4-1955.
(3.) The petition was admitted only so far as it alleged that the petitioner's, fundamental rights under the Constitution had been infringed.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.