BISHNOI, J. - (1.) THE instant appeal has been filed on behalf of the appellants -University against the order dated 19.02.2014 passed by the learned Single Judge in a writ petition preferred by the respondent -students along with eleven other writ petitions, whereby the learned Single Judge has partly allowed the writ petitions and directed the appellant - University to issue mark -sheets/degrees to the respondent -students, who have cleared all the semester examinations and completed Bachelor of Computer Application (hereinafter referred to as 'the BCA'). The learned Single Judge has also directed that the students, who have appeared in the IV and V Semester Examinations of the BCA, pursuant to the interim order passed by this Court and were declared passed therein, may be permitted to appear in the VI Semester Examination and their results may also be declared. However, while giving such directions, the learned Single Judge has made it clear that the above directions are passed while taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, essentially in the balance of equities and shall not form a precedent to be cited before any court or make entitle any other student pursuing BCA Course.
(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are that the respondent -students, who are pursuing BCA Three Years Degree Course having six semesters run by the various private colleges affiliated to the appellant -University, have filed the writ petition being aggrieved with the action of the appellant -University of not permitting them to appear in the BCA IV, V and VI Semesters Regular Examinations on account of their failure to clear all the units of I, all the units up to II and all the units up to III Semester respectively. The appellant -University vide order dated 05.07.2007, constituted a Three Members Committee to solve various problems of BCA related 'Allow To Keep Terms' (ATKT). The Three Members Committee, after going through the existing Rules and Regulations of BCA Course, resolved that the ATKT Rules and Regulations of BCA Course will remain the same as that of Master of Computer Application (for short 'the MCA' hereinafter). The recommendation of Three Members Committee was later considered by the Committee of Courses and Studies ('COCS') in its meeting held on 01.02.2012, wherein it was resolved that no candidate shall be permitted to appear in IV Semester Examination unless he/she has cleared all the units of I Semester and that no candidate shall be permitted to appear in V Semester Examination unless he/she has cleared all the units upto II Semester. Pursuant to the resolution of the Academic Council of the University, the respondent -students were not allowed to appear in IV, V and VI Semesters Regular Examinations on account of their failure to clear all the units of I, II and III semesters respectively. The said action of the appellant -University was challenged by the respondent -students by way of filing the writ petition, while contending that the Vice Chancellor of the appellant -University, while exercising powers under section 12(5) of Jai Narain Vyas University Act, 1962 (for short 'the Act of 1962' hereinafter) issued Notification dated 11.12.2010, whereby the students pursuing B.E. Course were granted exemption from check points and they were allowed to appear in the Final Year B.E. Examination, though they had not cleared ATKT papers of B.E. First Year, however, the same benefits were not extended to the students pursuing the BCA Course. The respondent - students, while alleging inequitable and discriminatory treatment, have approached the Vice Chancellor of the appellant -University through a representation claiming exemption from check points provided for BCA Course but to no avail, therefore, the writ petition was filed before this Court. The claim of the respondent - students was disputed by the appellant - University, while contending that the policy decision taken by the appellant -University with regard to academic affairs cannot be a subject -matter of judicial review by this Court. It was also contended on behalf of the appellant -University that section 12 read with section 17 of the Act of 1962 read with sections 7, 9, 9A & 9C of the Statues of the University make it abundantly clear that the Vice Chancellor acted well within its powers to constitute the Committee and the recommendations made by the Committee, were rightly made applicable to govern the ATKT Examination of BCA Course. It was also contended on behalf of the appellant - University that under section 12(5) of the Act of 1962, the Vice Chancellor is empowered to exercise its discretionary power if there exists any emergent situation and after taking into consideration the emergent situation, the power exercised by the Vice Chancellor in respect of the students pursuing B.E.Course does not create any right in favour of the respondent -students to claim the relaxation as a matter of right. It was also contended on behalf of the appellant - University that the respondent -students appeared in ATKT Examination of I Semester, while appearing in II and III Semesters Regular Examinations, cannot be permitted to contend that they may be allowed to appear in IV Semester Examination despite the fact that they have not cleared all the units of I Semester.
(3.) THE learned Single Judge, after taking into consideration the contentions raised by the rival parties, has held that the appellant -University, an autonomous body created by the statute, is governed by the statutory provisions and, therefore, the decision of its academic bodies cannot be interfered with by this Court except when its authorities act malafide or with bias or arbitrary or exceeds its jurisdiction under the relevant statues, rules and regulations. The learned Single Judge has also held that the respondent -students have not been able to make out any case as to how the decision taken by the academic bodies of the appellant -University providing for the check points for appearance in the IV and V Semester Examinations is arbitrary or exceeds the jurisdiction of the academic body under the statutes, rules and regulations. It has further been held by the learned Single Judge that while taking policy decision and providing check points, the appellant - University has not acted in irrational or arbitrary manner so as to warrant interference by this Court in exercise of its extra ordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.;