V.K. Khanna, R.P. Singh, JJ. - (1.) These four connected writ petitions raise similar questions regarding admissions of the petitioners to the B.Sc. (Ag.) course in the Tilak Dhan College, Jaunpur which is affiliated to the Gorakhpur University.
(2.) The brief facts for the purposes of deciding the present writ petitions are that for the academic session 1985-86 admissions to the B.Sc. (Ag.) year course were made by publishing a list (hereinafter referred to as the first list) round about 26th August, 1985. The petitioners in these four connected writ petitions have claimed that they had been admitted by the college and their names appeared in the first list. It appears that there was a dispute in respect of the principal of the college and on 11th October, 1985 another list of students to be admitted in B.Sc. (Ag.) year course was published which did not contain the names of the 51 students featuring in these four connected writ petitions. At this place it may be mentioned that the University Examination in respect of B.Sc. (Ag.) year course has already taken place in the month of April 1986 and all the petitioners have provisionally appeared in the examination under the orders of this court. The writ petitions were filed in this court in January 1986 and thereafter a perusal of the record of the writ petitions would indicate this court did not permit the petitioners of these four connected writ petitions to pursues their studies in the college but permitted then to appear in the examination provisionally as stated above some times in the month of February 1986. It is thus evident that after preparation of the second list in November 1986 the petitioners before us have not pursued their studies in the college as their names did not find place in the second list. The learned counsel for the petitioners in these writ petitioner have raised only are point. It has been argued before us that no order cancelling the admissions of the petitioners was ever served on the petitioners and that no opportunity was afforded to the petitioners before cancelling their admissions to the B.Sc. (Ag.) year course. On the admissions to the basis of the aforesaid facts it has been strenuously argued that the petitioners are entitled to a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to declare their results.
(3.) From the arguments raised by the counsels on behalf of the University and on behalf of the Management and from a perusal of the counter affidavits filed by them it becomes apparent that the stand taken by these contesting respondents is that first list was not prepared on the basis of merits of the students and thus the acting principal was forced to get a close scrutiny made of the first list and ask the students to produce their original marks-sheets before the appropriate authority. According to the Managing Committee this had to be done as a lot of complaints had been received that bungling had taken place in the preparation of the first list.;