- (1.) On mention made by learned counsel for the petitioner that examination is to commence from 5 May 2016 and the matter is extremely urgent, the record of the case was called for and the matter was heard in exercise of power under Ch.22, Rule 1(4) of the Allahabad High Court Rules.
(2.) The petitioner was given admission in BTC course during academic session 2013-14 at DIET, Agra. However, the petitioner claims that according to the preference given by her, she was entitled to admission at DIET, Lalitpur. Raising such grievance the petitioner filed Misc. Single No.3116 of 2014 before the Lucknow Bench of this Court and the writ petition filed by her was disposed of by an order dated 30.5.2014 in terms of judgement dated 28.5.2014 in Misc. Single No.3079 of 2014 Jyotna Singh vs. State of U.P. and others. In the said judgement, a direction was issued to grant admission to the petitioner of that case keeping in mind the Government Order dated 12.3.2014 which provided that a reserved category candidate, then even if he/she obtains quality point mark good enough to be placed under the general category, but her admission shall be granted keeping in mind the fact that he/she is a reserved category candidate. In pursuance of the order dated 30.5.2014 by the Lucknow Bench of this Court in the writ petition filed by the petitioner, the Principal DIET, Lalitpur passed an order dated 7.8.2014 by which the petitioner was granted admission at Lalitpur against one of the vacant seats. The case of the petitioner is that soon thereafter she took admission at DIET, Lalitpur and started pursuing her course. She passed I, II and II semester examinations. The case of the petitioner is that she was not permitted to fill the examination form of IV semester examination on the ground that she had not put in the requisite number of attendance. The petitioner had made a representation on 6.4.2016 to the third respondent for permitting her to appear in the IV semester examination. The said representation was forwarded by the Principal, DIET to the third respondent with favourable recommendation. The grievance of the petitioner is that third respondent has not taken any decision in the matter so far. Therefore, the petitioner has approached this Court seeking a mandamus directing the respondents to permit the petitioner to appear in the IV semester examination.
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner had regularly perused the course since the date she was granted admission at DIET, Lalitpur and in case there is any shortage of attendance, it was on account of reasons beyond her control. It is urged that since the respondent had wrongly not granted admission to the petitioner at Lalitpur for which she was forced to enter into litigation and whereupon she was granted admission, therefore, period spent in the litigation cannot be counted.;