- (1.) The petitioners in these four Civil Writ Petition Nos.9668 of 2012 (Rahul Kumar Vs. Deenbandhu Chhotu Ram University of Science & Technology, Sonepat and others), 9669 of 2012 (Suhaib Aalam Reshi Vs. Deenbandhu Chhotu Ram University of Science & Technology, Sonepat and others), , 9670 of 2012 (Mukesh Vs. Deenbandhu Chhotu Ram University of Science & Technology, Sonepat and others) and 9671 of 2012 (Ravi Kant Vs. Deenbandhu Chhotu Ram University of Science & Technology, Sonepat and others), were undergoing Master of Business Administration Course (MBA) with respondent Nos.1 to 3- Institutions and have impugned the order whereby their admission to the said course has been quashed on 11.5.2012 (Annexure P-1). Since common questions of fact and law arise in these cases, the above referred four writ petitions are being disposed of through this common order.
(2.) Noticing the facts in brief, as per the averments made in Civil Writ Petition No.9668 of 2012, it is seen that the petitioners were enrolled with Delhi Institute of Technology and Management (respondent No.3) for Post Graduate Degree Course in M.B.A, which is duly approved by respondent Nos.1 and 2 with which, respondent No.3-Institute is affiliated. Having appeared in the final examination of B.Com in the year 2008, the petitioners in these three writ petitions, namely, Rahul Kumar, Suhaib Alam Reshi, Mukesh and Ravi Kant passed the B.Com examination by obtaining 47.7%, 49.7%, 49% and 45% marks respectively. Thereafter, the petitioners took admission in the M.B.A Course in July 2011, after completing all the formalities. It is averred that the petitioners did not conceal any fact while seeking admission in the M.B.A Course and they were duly admitted after scrutinisation of the complete documents submitted by them at the time of seeking admission.
(3.) The petitioners thereafter have been attending the classes regularly and have also appeared in the Ist Semester Examination of the M.B.A Course, result of which was declared on 17.3.2012. Having qualified in the Ist Semester Examination, the petitioners moved on to IInd Semester. They were given admission card for IInd Semester and appeared in two papers examination of IInd Semester out of the total 8 papers. Suddenly, the petitioners were stopped from appearing in the examination on 17.5.2012 and 19.5.2012. To their shock, they were to learn, as was displayed on the notice board, that the petitioners stood barred from appearing in the rest of the examination as they had not scored 50% marks in the Graduation Examination. The petitioners found their career totally jeopardized. They claimed to be innocent young students, who have been subjected to this prejudice at this belated stage. The petitioners approached the respondent-Institutions to consider their case with sympathy but respondent No.3 has shown its inability to help them.;