- (1.) R. H. Zaidi, J. In both the aforesaid petitions common questions of law and fact are involved, therefore, they were heard together and are being disposed of by a common judgment, Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 9664 of 1993 is treated as the leading case.
(2.) BY means of this petition petitioner prays for a writ, order or direc tion in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 22-2-1993, passed by the respondent No. 1 and to direct the respondents to permit her to continue her studies in B. A. Part-II of the academic Session 1992-93 as well as to permit her to reside in the Hostel, i. e. Priyadarshani Hostel of Allahabad University on pay ment of usual charges. The facts of the case as set out in the writ petition are that the petitioner passed her High School Examination in 1989 and in the year 1991 Intermediate Examination, from the U. P. Board of High School and Intermediate, Allahabad. She also obtained N. C. C. Certificate in the year 1991. Thereafter, she appeared in the entrance test for her admission in B. A. Part-I in Allahabad University, Allahabad, in which she was secured 509 computed marks and qualified for admission in the said class. Thereafter she has allotted three subjects i. e. Medieval History, Hindi and Education and was allowed to attend the classes. Petitioner was also allotted a room in the Priyadarshani Hostel of Al lahabad University, Allahabad. The petitioner deposited the requisite admis sion fee and was thereafter issued an ad mission card, bearing Roll No. 3780. In the year 1991-92 petitioner appeared in B. A. Part-I Examination, but her result was withheld and thereafter by means of a show cause notice dated 17-11- 1992 she was called upon to appear before the en quiry committee on 6-12-1992 at the Law Faculty Building, Chatham Lines Campus, University of Allahabad. It is stated that on the date and time fixed in the notice referred to above, the petitioner went to the specified place with her father, but on the said date and time neither any enquiry-was conducted nor any meeting of the en quiry committee was held, but thereafter vide order dated 22-2- 1993 the petitioner's admission in B. A. Part-I of the year 1991- 92 academic session was can celled by the admission committee on the basis of the enquiry report. It was also stated that examination and the result of B. A. Part-I of the petitioner was also can celled by the examination committee. On the basis of the aforesaid order the petitioner was required to vacate the hos tel and was directed not to pursue her studies further in B. A. Part- II class. She therefore approached this Court and filed the present petition for the abovementioned reliefs. Writ petition was entertained by this Court and on 23-3-1993 following order was passed: "learned Counsel for the University, Sri Haider Husain, Advocate, prays for and is granted a week's time to file counter- affidavit. Rejoinder affidavit may be filed within a period of one week thereafter. List immediately after two weeks on 8-4-93. In the meantime, operation of the order dated 22-2-93 shall be kept in abeyance. It is also made clear that the seat, which was occupied by the petitioner in Priyadarshani Hostel, Univer sity of Allahabad, shall be kept vacant and shall not be allotted to anybody else. " Thereafter vide order dated 14-7-1993 this Court permitted the petitioner to appear in the examination of B. A. Part-II. However, it was directed that the result of the examination shall be subject to the decision of this petition.
(3.) ON behalf of the respondents a counter-affidavit has been filed con troverting the facts stated in the writ peti tion. It has been asserted that admissions in B. A. Part-I, B. Com. Part-I and B. Sc. Part-I were made in 1991-92 academic ses sion on the basis of entrance test. The result of the said test was declared but the name of the petitioner did not find place in the list of the candidates qualified in the said test as she did not qualify for the admission. It has been stated that the girl students who have secured 503 and the boys who have secured computed marks up to 505 were admitted in B. A. Part-I in the aforesaid academic session. Since the petitioner secured only 412 computed marks she was not qualified to be admitted in the said class. It has also been asserted that on receipt of complaints regarding illegal admission on the basis of forged documents, a committee consisting of five members was constituted to enquire into the said complaints and to submit its report. The said committee issued notices to the students concerned who were al leged to have obtained fictitious admis sion. Petitioner was also issued a show cause notice but she did not appear before the enquiry committee. The enquiry com mittee thereafter submitted a report against the petitioner, which was placed before the admission committee. The ad mission committee accepted the report of the enquiry committee and the admission of the petitioner was thereafter cancelled. In view of the said facts it was asserted that the writ petition filed by the petitioner was liable to be dismissed. In rely to the facts stated in the counter-affidavit a rejoinder-affidavit was filed by the petitioner, controverting the facts stated in the counter-affidavit, reiterating the facts stated in the writ peti tion. It was specifically stated that the petitioner secured 509 computed marks in the entrance test and was therefore, legally entitled to be admitted in B. A. Part-I. It was also stated that on the strength of the order passed by this Court, she after ap pearing in the B. A. Part-I also appeared in B. A. Part I and II Examinations, but the result of the said examinations have not been declared.;