A. Varadarajan, J. - (1.) These appeals by special leave are by the Punjab University and directed against two Division Bench judgments of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Writ Petitions 1917 of 1980 and 2349 of 1980, allowing those writ petitions without any order as to costs. W. P. 2349 of 1980 was allowed at the motion stage on 18-7-1980 as being covered by the decision in W. P. 1917 of 1980 which was disposed of on 7-7-1980. Kulwant Singh Tiwana, J. is a party to both the judgments and he sat with Harbans Lal, J. for hearing W. P. 1917 of 1980 and with M. M. Punchi, J. for hearing W. P. 2349 of 1980. In these circumstances, it is necessary to state only the facts relating to W. P. 1917 of 1980 alone briefly.
(2.) The system known as "10 plus 2 plus 3 system" was introduced in the educational institutions in the country some years ago. The Association of Indian Universities decided the equivalence of this 10 + 2 + 3 system with the old 11 + 3 years' degree course system which was prevalent in some States and it suggested that in all States where the pattern of education is such as to require 14 years for the first degree i. e. 11 + 3 years, the new plus 2 stage of the Central Board of Secondary Education to be treated as equivalent to a pass in the first year of the three-years' degree course or for admission to the first year of the two-years' degree course. This suggestion was conveyed by the Association of the Indian Universities to the Chairman of the Central Board of Secondary Education by a letter dated 18-4-1978. The appellant, Punjab University, decided on 10-12-1977 that the 12th Standard examination conducted by the Boards/Universities under the new 10+2+3 system be recognised as equivalent to the Pre-Medical/ Pre-Engineering/ B. A. Part I/ B. Sc. Part I/ B. Com. Part I examination according to the combination of the subjects. Subsequently, on 4-6-1978 the Punjab University decided to treat the 11th Standard of the new 10 + 2 + 3 system as equivalent to the Pre-University examination of the University. Copies of those decisions dated 10-12-1977 and 4-6-1978 were Annexures P.2 and P.3 respectively in W. P. 1917 of 1980. These recognitions of the equivalence of those two examinations continued till the beginning of the year 1980. But on 18-4-1980 the Punjab University decided that the first year student of the plus 2 course in the 10 + 2 + 3 system of the Central Board's Schools who does not take a public examination at the end of the first year should not be considered as equivalent to the student who has passed the Pre-University examination of the Punjab University for joining the Pre-Medical/ Pre-Engineering/ B. A. Part I/ B. Sc. Part I/ B. Com. Part I of the University. On 7-5-1980, the Punjab University decided that the 12th Standard Examination in the new 10 + 2 + 3 system conducted by any recognised Board/Council/University shall be treated as equivalent to the Pre-University Examination of the University. These decisions dated 18-4-1980 and 7-5-1980 are Annexures R-2 and R-3 respectively in W. P. 1917 of 1980.
(3.) Petitioners 1 to 37 in W. P. 1917 of 1980 had passed the 12th Standard examination in the 10 + 2 + 3 system of the Central Board of Education and petitioners 38 to 92 in the writ petition had been promoted from the 11th standard to the 12th Standard in that system. These 92 petitioners filed W. P. 1917 of 1980 challenging the Punjab University's decisions (Annexures R-2 and R-3) dated 18-4-1980 and 7-5-1980 contending that in view of the earlier decisions of the University, namely, Annexures P.2 and P.3 dated 10-12-1977 and 4-6-1978 respectively they had joined the classes in the plus 2 course with the object of joining the colleges affiliated to the University in the next class of equivalence as also Engineering and Medical Colleges and that the University cannot, therefore, change those decisions by the subsequent decisions, Annexures R-2 and R-3 to their detriment. They invoked the doctrine of promissory estoppel in regard to that ground of attack on those two decisions. The second ground of attack by the petitioners in W. P. 1917 of 1980 was that the decisions, Annexures R-2 and R-3 are retrospective in operation and they have taken away their vested right and that the University has no power, either under the Punjab University Act or under any statute, regulation or rule to make any regulation, rule or ordinance adversely affecting their vested rights retrospectively.;