Poonam Kumari vs H.P. University and Another

Deepak Gupta, J.—By means of this petition the Petitioner has prayed that Respondents may be directed to declare the result of the Petitioner in M.A. History.

The stand of the Respondent is that the Petitioner directly appeared in M.A. History 2nd semester as a private candidate in June, 2007. Thereafter, she appeared in 4th semester in June, 2008. The Petitioner then appeared in 3rd semester in December, 2008. According to the Respondent-university as per ordinance 8.40 a candidate cannot proceed to the 4th semester without appearing in the 3rd semester but in the present case the Petitioner first appeared in the 4th semester in June 2008 even though she had not appeared in the 3rd semester. Resultantly, the result of 1st and 4th semester have been withheld as the Petitioner had not appeared as per the ordinance.

Technically, the Respondent may be absolutely right but the Respondent-university has failed to point out any fault on the part of the Petitioner. A student may or may not be aware of all the rules and regulations of the university. It is true that in the examination forms it is mentioned that the candidate doing MA from direct second semester are supposed to do first semester after appearing in 4th semester examination clock-wise. This direction is also not very clear.

Therefore, in the peculiar facts of the case I find that the Petitioner was not at fault and since she has already appeared in the examination her result may be declared. It is, however, made clear that this order is passed in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case and shall not be treated as a precedent in any other matter. The petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs.