- (1.) ASHOK Bhushan, J. Heard Sri Shailendra, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri A. K. Srivastava, learned Counsel appearing for the respondent No. 1.
(2.) BY this writ petition the petitioner has prayed for issuing a writ of certiorari quashing the order dated 30-10-2002 and further directing the authorities concerned to allow the petitioner to take oath of the post of President in reference to election held on 19-10-2002. A writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari has also been prayed for quashing the order dated 25-11-2002 passed by the respondent No. 1. It has also been prayed that a writ of mandamus be issued restraining the respondents from holding oath ceremony in respect of respondent No. 3 on the post of President for Student Union for Session 2002-2003. A writ of mandamus has also been sought restraining the respondents authorities from interfering in the working of the petitioner as office bearer of the Student Union. Further, a writ has also been sought for directing he respondents authorities to give status of a regular student to the petitioner. Facts giving rise to the present writ petition which emerges from the pleadings of the parties are; Petitioner appeared in B. A. Part I Examination from Lal Bahadur Shastri Post Graduate College, Mughal Sarai, District Chandauli in the year 2001-2002. Petitioner claimed to have passed B. A. Part I and took admission in B. A. Part II of the same college. The election of students Union of the Lal Bahadur Shastri Post Graduate College, Mughal Sarai, District Chandauli was held on 19th October, 2002 in which the petitioner contested for the post of President as being student of B. A. Part II and was declare elected on 19th October, 2002. The respondent No. 3 who was next contestant for the post of President of Student Union, filed a complaint to the Principal of the Institution on 25-10-2002 stating that the petitioner has not passed B. A. Part I and has failed in B. A. Part I and he took admission in B. A. Part II on the basis of forged mark sheet and has fictitiously contested the election of the office of President of the Union. The Principal issued notice to the petitioner on 25th October, 2002 asking the petitioner to produce his original mark sheet of B. A. Part I so that it may be verified. It was stated that if the petitioner does not get his mark sheet verified further proceedings treating the petitioner admission as ficititious will be taken. Petitioner submitted reply on 26th October, 2002 in which he has stated that his original mark sheet has been lost and he is taking steps for getting another mark sheet. On 30th October, 2002 the petitioner gave another application to the Principal in which he acknowledged that according to the Tabulation Register of the College petitioner has failed but due to ignorance he has taken admission in B. A. Part II on the basis of the mark sheet issued by the College, he has stated that he did not verify the mark sheet with the Tabulation Register. It was further stated that his admission in B. A. Part II be cancelled and he be treated as regular student of B. A. Part I. He prayed that his admission in B. A. Part I be treated with effect from 28th September, 2002 on which date he deposited his fee. He prayed that he should be administered oath of the office of President of the Students Union. After receiving the aforesaid application dated 30th October, 2002 the Committee of the College heard both the parties and came to the conclusion that the admission of the petitioner in B. A. II is illegal on own showing of the petitioner as admitted by the petitioner in his application dated 30-10-2002. Principal issued an order dated 30th October, 2002 cancelling the admission of the petitioner in B. A. Part II and it was further stated in the order that with regard to administering oath of the office of President of the Students Union further action will be taken after taking legal advice. The petitioner challenged the above order dated 30-10-2002 before this Court. This Court passed an interim order dated 11-11-2002. By interim order of this Court the petitioner was allowed fifteen day's time to apply for re-admission to B. A. Part I. The interim order further stated that if such an application is made the College will consider the same in accordance with law and if permissible the petitioner will be admitted to B. A. Part I and if the petitioner is not entitled to be re-admitted to B. A. Part I, the College will pass a reasoned order. After the aforesaid interim order Principal considered the representation of the petitioner for admission in B. A. Part I and vide order dated 25-11-2002 the Principal of the College stated that the petitioner cannot be admitted in B. A. Part I. It was further stated that if the petitioner submits application as x-student of B. A. Part I then his application can be forwarded to the University which benefit is available to the petitioner only upto 16th December, 2002. It was further stated that in case the Hon'ble High Court directs the State Government and the University to create special seat for the petitioner then the Management will admit the petitioner in accordance with the said order. Petitioner failed amendment application for challenging the said order dated 25-11-2002 which was allowed by this Court and he was permitted to challenge the said order also.
(3.) COUNTER-affidavit has been filed by the Principal of the Institution. It was stated in the counter- affidavit that the petitioner has failed in B. A. Part I examination, copy of Tabulation Chart of the College of B. A. Part I sent from the University has also been annexed as Annexure 1 to the counter-affidavit saying that the petitioner has failed in B. A. Part I. It was further stated that the petitioner did not show his original mark sheet when called by the college. During the course of arguments Counsel for the petitioner has not challenged the order of the college dated 30th October, 2002 cancelling the admission of B. A. Part II of the petitioner presumably due to the reason that the petitioner himself in the application filed on 30-10-2002 has stated that his admission in B. A. Part II be cancelled and he may be treated to be regular student of B. A. Part I. From the averments made in the counter-affidavit and the copy of the tabulations chart filed as Annexure 1 to the counter-affidavit it is proved that the petitioner has failed in B. A. Part I 2002 Examination having secured only 184 marks. After the complaint was made by the respondent No. 3 to the College that the petitioner has taken admission in B. A. Part II on the basis of forged mark sheet, petitioner was called upon by the Principal vide letter dated 25-10-2002 to produce the original mark sheet which was not produced by the petitioner and immediately thereafter, on 30-10-2002 petitioner came up with the prayer that his admission in B. A. Part II be cancelled and he be treated as regular student of B. A. Part I. This conduct of the petitioner shows that the petitioner knew about the weakness of his case that he has not passed B. A. Part I and his admission in B. A. Part II was made on the basis of a bogus mark sheet. In this Court also the cancellation of admission has not been challenged and the submissions of the Counsel for the petitioner were confined only towards entitlement of the petitioner to be admitted in B. A. Part I as a regular student.;