- (1.) THIS is a defendant's second appeal arising out of a suit for a mandatory injunction directing the defendant to declare the result of the plaintiff's examination in B. Sc. Part II held by the Bundhelkhand University.
(2.) SHORTLY stated, the plaint case was that the plaintiff was a regular student of B. Sc. part II (M) Section in the Bipin Behari Degree College Jhansi in the year 1978-79. He appeared at the Special Final Examination of B. Sc. Part II in the year 1979. The said college is affiliated to Bundhelkhand University, Jhansi and it is the examining body. According to the information received by the plaintiff he had duly passed the aforesaid Special Final Examination of B. Sc. Part II but his result had been withheld allegedly on the ground that the petitioner had procured his admission to the final B. Sc. Part II examination on the bask of a forged mark-sheet which he had obtained in collusion with some clerk of the defendant University, according to which mark-sheet the plaintiff had passed B. Sc. Part I examination when, in fact, he had failed at that examination. The plaintiff had, however, duly passed the B. Sc. Part I examination, as a result of the revised marksheet which was issued to him upon re-evaluation of his marks in the subject of Chemistry. In the first instance the plaintiff had been declared to have failed at the B. Sc. Part I examination held in 1979. However, the plaintiff applied for reevaluation of his papers in Chemistry as a consequence of which he was declared to have passed the said examination. In addition to applying for reevaluation of his papers in Chemistry, the plaintiff had also submitted the form for B. Sc. Part I of 1979 examination as an ex-student by way of abundant caution so that in the event of his not succeeding even as a result of re-evaluation he might take another chance at the B. Sc. Part I examination of 1979. However, in the meantime the plaintiff's papers were re-evalued and he was declared to have passed both in the theory as well as the practical of Chemistry. The Plaintiff was issued a revised marksheet, according to which he had passed the B. Sc. Part I examination. On the strength of the said mark-sheet the plaintiff was duly admitted to the B. Sc. Part II class as well as at the Special Final Examination of B. Sc. Part II. The defendant was under these circumstances estopped from challenging the correctness of the revised mark-sheet as well as from withholding the result of the plaintiff's examination in B. Sc. Part II. The defence of the appellant was that at the B. Sc. Part I examination held in the year 1978 the plaintiff had obtained the following marks:- 1. Physics (theory) 31 out of 100 2. Physics (Practical) 25 out of 50 3. Chemistry (theory) 23 out of 100 4. Chemistry (Practical) 44 out of 50 5. Mathematics 69 out of 150. Thereafter the plaintiff applied for reevaluation of his papers in Chemistry at which he was awarded the following marks:- 1. Chemistry Ist paper 12 (instead of 5 obtained initially ). 2. Chemistry II paper 7 (instead of 9 obtained initially ). 3. Chemistry III paper 8 (instead of 9 obtained initially ). Thus the plaintiff had obtained a total of 27 marks out of 100 at the reevaluation in theory of Chemistry. As he had obtained less than 33 per cent marks, he could not be declared in have passed. However, somehow he got his admission in B. Sc. Part II by manipulating the mark-sheet issued to him. When the result of the Special Final Examination was being prepared, the Tabulation Chart of B. Sc. part I in respect of the plaintiff in the Chemistry II paper was found tampered with. The plaintiff was asked to produce his mark-sheet to find out the correct position but he did not submit the same. Thereupon the position was checked and it was found that in the Tabulation Chart in Chemistry II paper the figure '7' had been changed into '17'. On these facts it was clear that the plaintiff had wrongly obtained admission into the B. Sc. Part II examination on the basis of misrepresentation and collusion.
(3.) ON the pleading of the parties, relevant issues were framed by the Trial Court. The parties led evidence and on a consideration of the same the Trial Court held that the plaintiff had failed to pass B. sc. Part I examination and consequently there was no question of declaring his result of B. Sc. Part II examination. As a result, the suit was dismissed. Aggrieved, the plaintiff filed an appeal which has been allowed. The appellate Court formulated two questions for its consideration namely. (i) whether the plaintiff had passed the B. Sc. Part I examination and (ii) whether the respondent (defendant) is estopped from challenging the correctness of the revised mark-sheet after having permitted the plaintiff to appear at the B. Sc. Part II examination.;