Decided on September 10,2012

Davender Kumar And Others Appellant
H.N.B. Garhwal University And Another Respondents


Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. - (1.) PETITIONERS are permitted to implead Bar Council of India through Secretary as respondent No. 3 in the array of parties during the course of the day. Petitioner is directed to serve respondent No. 3 within a week. Meanwhile, the grievance of the petitioners is that they have taken admission in a Law College, which is at Roorkee known as B.S.M. Law College. They have given examination of IInd semester in the month of May 2010 but their results have not been declared as yet.
(2.) UNIVERSITY (respondent No. 1) in its counter affidavit have stated certain revealing facts in its para 5, which has been sworn by Manmohan Singh Rana who is Office Superintendent, H.N.B. Garhwal University, which reads as under: - 5. That the contents of para No. 3 of the writ petition are wrong, misconceived hence, denied. It is respectfully submitted to this Hon'ble Court that the respondent No. 1 neither issued the Admit cards nor any Roll Nos. to these petitioners and further there is no question of any permission by the University for the petitioners to sit in the examination in absence of valid Admit cards and Roll Nos. and further more these petitioners were never permitted by the University to appear in the LL.B. examination conducted by the University hence, the result of the petitioners could not be declared by the University since the University has not permitted these petitioners to appear in the examination. In other words, the stand of the University (respondent No. 1) is that no steps were taken by the University regarding the conduct of examination for which the petitioners seeks declaration of result inasmuch as University (respondent No. 1) had neither issued the petitioners Admit Cards or Roll Nos.
(3.) THIS Court deems it fit and proper that regarding the future of the present petitioners particularly the declaration of result as well as admission in next semester, the petitioners shall make a representation with the Vice -Chancellor of the University (respondent No. 1) who shall hear the grievance of the petitioners and take a decision on it within four weeks from the date such representation is filed before him. While doing so, the concerned authority of the University (respondent No. 1) shall also consider that what is actually involved here is also the future of the students. The concerned authority of the University (respondent No. 1) shall explore all possible avenues under the law to bring out a solution to the problem relating to the petitioners. Needless to say that the same shall be done in accordance with law. List this matter after five weeks in the daily cause list.;

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.