ASHOK KUMAR MATHUR,J. - (1.) THESE are the sixteen appeals involving a similar question of law and fact, therefore, they are finally disposed of together on the basis of an agreement between the parties. A notice was also given to the University and the University has been served, but nobody has chosen to appear and contest into detail facts.
(2.) IT is not necessary to go into detail facts as the short question involving in these appeals is that the students having been allowed by the Court by its order dated September 9, 19,86 were not permitted to take their final examination in the B.Ed. (Vacation) Course for the session 1986 -87. The objection which has been raised by the institution was that the candidates have not delivered forty teaching lessons and have not observed the same number of lessons during the Session. The contention of the Management is that these candidates, though knowing fully -well the implication of their agreement before Division Bench on 14 -8 -86 have given in writing that they will not insist for the studies which have already been covered by institution should be repeated, if they are admitted to the course. The resultant position is that these forty lessons have already been completed and now at the end of the Sessions they are rendered ineligible because of not completing forty lessons in teaching. This had driven appellants to file fresh writ petitions before this Court. This court by its order dated September 9, 1986 dismissed all the writ petitions on the ground that in view of the agreement arrived at between the parties, no relief can be given to them. Aggrieved by the order dated September 9, 1986 the petitioner appellants have approached this Court by filing Special Appeals. The notices of these appeals were given to the respondents in pursuance thereof Mr. Maheshwari for Management and Mr. Balia, Director respondent No. 3, and the Principal respondent No. 4 have appeared. The notices of these appeals were also given to the University, but it has not appeared.
(3.) ARGUMENTS were heard at length and after considering over the matter, we think it just and proper that the following directions should be issued in the interest of justice: The Syllabus for the B.Ed. (Vacation) Course lays down that the forms shall be forwarded to the University by the Head of the Institution certifying that the candidate has successfully undergone a regular course of study -both in theory and practice. In the present cases, there is no dispute about the successful completion of teaching course, so far theory is concerned. However, the difficulty is regarding the teaching of practice Thus we direct that the Principal (Head of the Institution) shall forward the application forms of all these appellants to the University without insisting for successfully undergoing the regular course in the practice in teaching. The University shall accept the forms of such candidates (appellants) as forwarded by the Principal and shall permit them to appear in theory papers. The University is further directed to examine these candidates in practice of teaching after they have successfully undergone the regular course of practice in teaching and the same certified by the Principal (Head of this Institution). The Principal is directed to complete this Course within five weeks after the theory papers are over. The University shall declare the result of these candidates after obtaining a certificate from the Principal (Head of this Institution) that the candidates have already undergone the necessary practical course. The appeals shall accordingly stand disposed of. ;