Rakesh Kumar Jain, J. - (1.) BY way of this order, I shall dispose of two writ petitions bearing CWP Nos. 26944 and 27034 of 2013 as the common issue is involved in both the cases. However, the facts are extracted from CWP -26944 -2013. The petitioner has approached this Court with a grievance that his prayer for a mercy chance to appear in two papers of BAMS 1st Prof, to be held in December, 2013, has been rejected illegally by the respondents. It is alleged that the petitioner had already cleared 4 out of 6 subjects but due to ill health of his father, he could not clear the remaining 2 subjects.
(2.) THE petitioner got admission in BAMS 1st Prof. in respondent No. 2 -College affiliated to respondent No. 1 -University. The BAMS 1st Prof. consists of 6 subjects, namely, Sanskrit, Kriya Shareer, Padarth Vigyan, Ayurved Ka Itihas, Rachna Shareer and Ashtang Hridya. There are 10 papers of the aforesaid 6 subjects. The annual examination of BAMS 1st Prof. was conducted in November/December -2011 in which the petitioner appeared but could not clear even one of the subjects. It is alleged that father of the petitioner was not keeping good health as he was suffering from Coronary Artery Disease coupled with Diabetes Mellitus. His father was admitted in a hospital in Ludhiana on 18.11.2011, underwent by -pass surgery on 19.11.2011 and discharged from the hospital on 29.11.2011. The petitioner appeared in two re -appear chances given by respondent No. 1 in May/June -2012 and November/December 2012 but could not clear the subjects of BAMS 1st Prof. He then appeared in the 3rd and final re -appear chance in all 6 subjects in May/June 2013 and cleared 4 subjects but could not clear 2 subjects i.e. Sanskrit and Ayurved Ka Itihas. The petitioner has, thus, cleared 4 out of 6 subjects i.e. 7 papers out of total 10 papers and as such, his result was declared as fail in the BAMS 1st Prof. It is also alleged that the petitioner had attended the classes of BAMS 2nd Prof. for 1 - = years but was not allowed to appear in the annual examination of BAMS 2nd Prof. which were held in May/June -2013. He applied for a mercy chance to appear in remaining two subjects but, vide communication dated 29.11.2013, he was informed about the rejection of his request.
(3.) COUNSEL for the petitioner has submitted that in a similar set of circumstances, another student of different college affiliated to respondent No. 1, namely, Jaspreet Kaur, could not clear BAMS 1st Prof. However, she was given mercy chance by respondent No. 1 in which she could clear only one subject and was again given another mercy chance to clear the remaining one subject in May/June -2012 vide letter dated 10.05.2012. It is further submitted that one student, namely, Amanpreet Kaur was also given two mercy chances to clear her BAMS 1st Prof. Firstly she was given a mercy chance during May -June 2010 and when she could not clear the said subject, another mercy chance was afforded to her in November/December 2010. The petitioner has also placed on record information under the Right to Information Act, 2005, about the students who have been given mercy chance and has claimed parity. The petitioner has also made a reference to an interim order passed by this Court in CWP No. 3870 of 2013 to buttress his arguments.;