- (1.) In Civil Original Suit No. 337/1997 filed by the respondent No.1 Rajesh Kumar Makhija for declaration and perpetual injunction against the appellant- Mohan Lal Sukhadiya University, Udaipur and the Principal, Vidya Bhawan Govind Ram Seksaria Teachers Education College, Udaipur, the Civil Judge (Junior Division), Udaipur City (North), Udaipur while passing the decree against the defendants on 20-1-1998, declared the action of the appellant- University for cancellation of the admission and examination of the plaintiff, as illegal and void; and directed them to declare the result of the M. Ed. Examination taken by the plaintiff. The appeal taken by the University, being Civil Appeal No. 17/1998, was dismissed by the Additional District Judge No.2, Udaipur on 1-2-1999. Aggrieved, the defendant No.l appellant-Mohan Lal Sukhadia University has preferred this Second Appeal.
(2.) While admitting the instant Second Appeal on 7-5-1999, this Court formulated the following substantial questions of law involved in this case :- "1]. Whether in view of the finding recorded by the learned trial Court on issue No.3, which has been affirmed by the appellate Court, the judgments passed by both the Courts below extending the benefit of promissory estoppel in the present case is not sustainable in the eye of law? 2]. Whether the law of promissory estoppel popularly known as equitable estoppel is meant to mitigate the rigor of law to promote justice and honesty in society and not to promote playing mischief in society? 3]. Whether both the Courts below in the present case have committed substantial error of law in extending the benefit of promissory estoppel to the plaintiff, who is seeking admission in M. Ed. course without passing the B. Ed. course from a recognised University.? 4]. Whether the principle of promissory estoppel is applicable in present case when the plaintiff-respondent had got admission on the basis of misrepresentation and concealment of his educational qualifications?"
(3.) The dispute between the parties had its genesis in the fact that the plaintiff-respondent No. 1 Rajesh Kumar Makhija applied for and was granted admission in the M. Ed. Course for the Session 1994-95 in the respondent No.2 College that is affiliated to the appellant-University. The plaintiff thereafter applied for and was granted permission to appear in the examination conducted by the appellant-University on Roll No. 89316. The result of M. Ed. Examination was declared on 4-7-1995 but the result of the plaintiff was withheld; and after his notices, by the letter dated 15-5-1996, the appellant-University informed the plaintiff of cancellation of his admission for the reason that he was "admitted wrongly in the College as he has passed B. Ed. (Bridge Course) from Rajasthan Vidya Peeth (Bal Vikas), Udaipur which is not equivalent in this University for admission to M.Ed. Class course". Having received such cancellation order, the plaintiff filed the present suit.;