Miss Anan Ashraf vs Union of India and others

The named petitioner herein had earlier filed the writ petition bearing No. 388 of 2016 on her grievance against the denial of permission to

appear in the Third Semester Examination of the course undertaken by her in the respondent - University but, for the Ordinance having not been

challenged, and the said petition was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file afresh.

The fresh petition bearing No. 409 of 2016 was considered on 02.03.2017 when it was alleged on behalf of the respondent - University that the

petitioner had procured her Transfer Certificate on 02.12.2016 i.e., before filing of the writ petition but such a fact was concealed. At the given

stage, learned counsel for the petitioner sought permission again to withdraw so as to file another petition on all grounds of challenge. Though

learned counsel appearing for the respondent - University opposed the prayer for withdrawal but looking to the overall circumstances and the fact

that the matter concerns the academic career of the petitioner, we extended indulgence of withdrawal with liberty to file afresh while keeping all

objections of the respondent open.

Now, the present petition has been filed in the name of the petitioner but herein, we have noticed a fundamental shortcoming that the petition is

not supported by the affidavit of the petitioner nor even a proper power of attorney has been executed in favour of the person filing the petition on

her behalf and an alleged authorisation by the petitioner on a plain paper has been filed.

The fact of the matter remains that a serious question has been raised by the respondents that the petitioner had been issued the Transfer

Certificate and hence, she was not entitled to maintain any cause against the respondent - University. It is sought to be alleged on behalf of the

petitioner, as noticed from the averments taken in the petition, that the act of the respondent - University in issuing Transfer Certificate was not

bonafide and was rather an attempt to frustrate her cause. It is also sought to be stated that the petitioner was in a disturbed and depressed state of

mind and it had never dawned upon her that she has been issued a Transfer Certificate; and the Transfer Certificate was issued without her asking

for the same.

We have expressed reservations in entertaining this writ petition where a proper power of attorney has not been executed and in any case, the

averments of the nature indicated above are of the specific personal knowledge of the named petitioner herself and of none else.

Upon our expressing reservations thus, learned counsel for the petitioner yet again makes a prayer for withdrawal with liberty for the petitioner

to file afresh. Obviously, the learned counsel for the respondent - University has raised serious objections to this prayer. However, we are of the

view, as observed earlier too, that this matter concerns the academic career of the named petitioner; and even if there are technical flaws and faults

on her part, interest of justice shall be served if indulgence as sought for is again extended while yet again keeping all the objections of the

respondent open for consideration in accordance with law. Ordered accordingly.

This petition stands dismissed as withdrawn with liberty and observations foregoing.