RAJESH BALIA, J. - (1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the parties.
(2.) THE appellant has filed this petition for seeking mandams against the respondent Jai Narain Vyas University for permitting him to change stream of his studies from Mining Engineering to Mechanical Engineering from II Year of the four years integrated B.E. Course. The learned Single Judge has rejected the petition filed by the appellant even without calling upon the respondent to file reply following the decision rendered in Writ Petition No. 334/2000 Vishal Chopra v. Jai Narain Vyas University, decided on 8th March, 2000. We have permitted learned Counsel for the University appearing in appeal to file a reply to the writ petition. In the reply affidavit, the stand taken is that as per the rules framed by the Academic Council of respondent University regarding change of branch, the change of branch of II Year is permissible within limited sphere and such change should not result in reducing the total strength of students in the II Year below 80% of the sanctioned strength because of the out going number of the students from the stream nor it should result in exceeding 110% of the sanctioned strength of the other stream by incoming students by opting to change their branch. Annexure R/2 was placed on record disclosing the decision of the respondents concerning the change of branch in the II Year B.E. of the 4 years integrated course. In consonance with that provision, it has further been stated in the affidavit that as per the aforesaid rules, the number of students in Mechanical Branch to which change is sought for the Session 1999 -2000 cannot be more than 46 and number of students from Mining Branch from which change is sought cannot be less than 23 and any further transfer from Mining Branch to the Mechanical Branch would violate both the limits namely the upper limit of the students to be admitted in the Mechanical Branch and the lower limit of the students to be retained in the running Branch. It has also been pointed out in the reply affidavit that the options for permitting change of branch has been considered strictly in accordance with the merit of the students as per the marks obtained in the I year B.E. The last option accepted in the Mining Branch for change over to another branch was of Dheeraj Sharma who had secured 880 marks in B.E. 1st Year while the present petitioner -appellant, even after evaluation of his marks, has secured only 840 marks, therefore, there is no discrimination on the basis of merit obtained by the students belonging to the Mining stream, in considering options for change.
(3.) WHILE these facts have not been disputed, it has been urged by Mr. Vyas, learned Counsel for the appellant, that in B.E. First Year there is common syllabi and a person securing less marks than the petitioner, who was a student of Civil Engineering Branch, has been permitted to change over from Civil Engineering to another breach but the petitioner, who has secured more marks than him has not been permitted to change his branch. This has resulted in branch of merit rule in permitting the exercise of change of branch in Second Year B.E. This contention, in our opinion, is founded on comparing the two in comparables who are from different streams.;