- (1.) The petitioners seek for a direction to respondents 2 and 3, namely, Khalsa College and the Principal to allow the petitioners to continue their M.Sc. Agriculture (Hons) Agricultural Economics and to permit them to give their final examination of 3rd semester and internal examination. The writ petition is a response to a notice issued on 18.10.2011 that the petitioners had not deposited scheduled fee for M.Sc. Agriculture in violation of the undertaking given by them in CWP No.12562 of 2010, dated 27.08.2010. The notice purports to cancel the admission already effected. This court, while issuing notice of motion on 18.11.2011, stayed the operation of the order and allowed for the students to continue, subject only to the condition that they exhibited good conduct and they gave an undertaking in writing for their good behaviour. By subsequent order on 03.05.2012, the Vice Chancellor and the Controller of Examinations, Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar were directed to issue provisional roll numbers to the petitioners and allowed them the benefit of writing the examination scheduled for 7th and 10th May of 2012. On 19.07.2012, the court has recorded the representation made on behalf of the petitioners that despite the first order passed on 18.11.2011 and the subsequent order, the college had not allowed the petitioners to sit in the examination. After several adjournments and after direction for payment of costs, the respondents-College had filed a reply.
(2.) In the written statement filed bringing out the fact that the petitioners had been guilty of suppression of material facts, namely, of registration of a complaint in FIR No.34, dated 12.02.2009 regarding the petitioners' alleged involvement in the damage to national property at Jallianwala Bagh, the respondents would also submit that the petitioners had earlier approached this court in CWP No.12562 of 2010 and this court had allowed the petitioners admission only subject to the condition that they would tender unconditional apology and deposit the proportionate fee amongst the admitted students in M.Sc. Agriculture. Pursuant to the order issued by this court on 03.05.2012, the University had issued roll numbers to the petitioners and they also were allowed to appear in the examinations held on 7th and 10th May, 2012. The representations made in the court that was recorded in the court's order dated 19.07.2012 that they were not permitted to sit in the examinations was false. Joining issues on the reasons that culminated in issuing of notice of cancellation of admission, respondents 2 and 3 would submit that the rules and regulations issued in the prospectus for 2010-11 provided that fee could be increased or decreased from time to time as per the instructions of the Managing Committee, University and Punjab Government. The admissions made for 2011-12 of the petitioners' batch did not elicit sufficient response and they were lesser number of persons than the optimum strength that could have made it viable to conduct the course. The petitioners and other students, who had applied, were informed that they would share the fees of 12 students since it was a self-financing course and the minimum requirement was a strength of 12. There were only 7 students available and this was to be shared amongst 7. While the petitioners shared the fee proportionately for the first year, they refused to pay the fee for the second year. There had been an undertaking given by the petitioners that they would deposit the fee as demanded by the college for the 3 rd and 4th semester as per the directions of this court in the instant writ petition.
(3.) The University has filed an independent reply and it is contended that the petitioners are not eligible to appear in the 3rd or the 4th semester examinations unless recommended by the college. The ordinance 3.3 of the University required (a) that the candidate has been on the college roll through out the period of the semester; (b) that the candidate has attended 80% of the lectures both in theory and practical held separately in each subject; and (c) that he bears a good moral character. The petitioners did not fulfill the requirement of attending 80% lectures but they however, were allowed to take two papers of the 4th semester in May 2012 only thanks to the orders passed by this court on 03.05.2012. The University would also submit that only marks in the examination had been received by the University, but their internal assessment, practical and research work marks had not been awarded by the college. Even their research thesis for 3rd and 4th semester had not been submitted as required in Ordinance 5. The course of studies for the 3rd and 4th semesters had ended respectively on July-November 2011 and January-May 2012. Since the course was complete, they were not eligible to appear in the 3rd semester without seeking fresh admission in July-November 2013 as per the Ordinance 3.1 Moreover, the petitioners having not passed or appeared in the 3rd semester examination cannot be admitted to the 4th semester of the course in view of the statutory bar under Ordinance 3.10. Under the University's separate general Ordinances, the petitioners could complete their courses in 4 years from the date of seeking their admission in the first semester, that is, before May/June 2014 after satisfying conditions in the Ordinance and subject to the requirement of submission of thesis.;