Shehwal Mahmood vs University Of Jammu And Others

Rajnesh Oswal, J

The writ petition bearing OWP No. 812 of 2015 has been filed by the petitioner for directing the respondents to allow the petitioner to sit in the 2nd semester of five years law course and the Court vide order dated 09.06.2015, allowed the petitioner to participate in the examination of second term of five years law course.

During the pendency of aforesaid petiton, another writ petition bearing OWP No. 1257 of 2015 was filed by the petitioner, seeking direction to the respondents to allow him to sit in the 3rd semester of five years law course and the Court vide order dated 04.09.2015, allowed the petitioner to attend the classes of 3rd semester of five years law course.

Mr. Muzaffar Iqbal Khan, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has participated in all the subsequent semesters and the results of the said semesters too have been declared. Mr. Khan further submits that the father of the petitioner was suffering from cancer and he was getting treatment in the Tata Memorial Centre, Mumbai in the month of February, 2015 and the petitioner, the only son was busy in connection with the treatment of his father.

Per contra, Mr. W. S. Nargal, learned senior counsel has vehemently submitted that no leniency can be shown to the petitioner and the University of Jammu-respondent has no power to condone the shortage of the petitioner

The response stands filed by the respondents in both the writ petitions. In OWP No. 812 of 2015, it is stated that as there was shortage of attendance of the petitioner in the 2nd semester, so the same could not have been condoned. In OWP No. 1257 of 2015, a similar stand has been taken by the respondents, however, it has been stated that result of the petitioner of semester 10 of five years law course has been declared vide notification dated Eval//Prof-I/21/6158-59 dated 20.07.2021.

Heard and perused the record.

From the perusal of the record, it is evident that there is no shortage of the petitioner so far as semester 3 is concerned, i.e the subject matter of subsequent writ petition i.e. OWP No. 1257 of 2015 and during the intervening period, the petitioner has qualified all the semesters and the result of the 10th semester too has been declared vide notification dated 20.07.2021.

Be that as it may, the petitioner has successfully qualified all the semesters and the matter has remained pending before the Court for the last six long years and no efforts were made by either of the parties to get the matter disposed of.

Taking into consideration that the petitioner is still at the threshold of his career and in the event, instant petitions of the petitioner are dismissed, prejudice shall be caused to the petitioner.

In view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case, as the Court had permitted the petitioner to participate in the examination as well as to attend the classes in the subsequent semester and he has been successful in all the semesters so no further directions are required to be passed, as such, these petitions are disposed of. However, the respondents shall be at liberty to issue the requisite qualification certificate in favour of the petitioner, if there is no other legal impediment.

Disposed of.