The Registrar, Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences vs Mrs. G. Hemalatha and The Principal Novodaya College of Nursing

This appeal is preferred by the Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences, challenging the order of the learned Single Judge who has quashed the endorsement issued By them stating that writ petitioner was not eligible to be admitted to the post graduation course in M.Sc. (Nursing). For the purpose of conveyance parties are referred as per their ranking in the writ petition. The writ petitioner completed Bachelor of Science decree in Nursing with aggregate marks of 54.71 from N.T.R. University of Health Sciences in the year 1997. Thereafter registered herself as a Public Health Nurse and midwifes. She also registered as nurse under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh Nurses and Midwifes (Extension of Amendment) Act 1964. She was appointed as a working staff Nurse at the Primary Health Centre, Nagasamudram (AP) on 08.07.1999. She had served for eight years and three months in the said institution.

With the intention to pursue a Post-graduate course in M.Sc. (Nursing) (for short hereinafter referred to as the PG Course), made a representation to the Regional Director of Medical Health Services, seeking permission to pursue the same. The authority has prescribed the eligibility to secure admission to the said course as 55% aggregate marks, however, the petitioner aggregate marks was 54.71%. She approached the 3rd respondent-the Secretary, Indian Nursing Council, requesting the issuance for a certificate of eligibility to take up the course on the basis on those marks. The 3rd respondent communicated to the petitioner that 0.50% would normally be rounded-off to next digit and informed her to approach the concerned authority of the institute in that regard. Accordingly, she had approached respondent No. 1 who gave the said eligibility certificate. It is thereafter, she approached 2nd respondent college with this certificate and obtained admission in the management quota. when she was preparing to take her annual examination, she was informed by the 2nd respondent that she was not eligible to take examination as she has secured less than 55% in the qualifying examination. Therefore, she preferred W.P. No. 80407/2010 challenging the said communication and also for an interim order permitting her to take examination. Interim order was granted and she took the examination. Results were withheld she was also permitted to take 2nd years examination by an interim order in the said petition. Thus, she has completed the course, written both the examinations.

It is in this context, we have find out ''Whether the petitioner has the eligibility criteria for being admitted to the P.G. course?" The learned dingle Judge has taken pains to refer to several texts and also the decisions and has recorded findings that the ruling of the rule of ma them a tics as regards ''rounding-off of numbers'' that, the rules and axioms of mathematics are applied while calculating the marks and in arriving at percentage, there is no reason as to why the said rule ought not to be applied in the case of rounding-off of numbers and therefore, he further held that 54.71% marks obtained by the petitioner be rounding up to 55% by applying the rule of rounding-off of numbers. He further held that, the petitioner possess the requisite qualification to appear for the examination and therefore, he has set aside the endorsement issued by the University. Aggrieved by the said order the University filed this appeal.

The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the learned Single Judge of this Court in the ease of Miss N. Gayathramma Vs. Ravij Gandhi University of Health Sciences, The Secretary, Department of Social Welfare, Government of Karnataka and The Principal Premier College of Nursing, has taken a contrary view and it is held.

The eligibility norms prescribed, by the 1st respondent, for admission to the said course, is not flexible, empowering the 1st respondent University to exercise a discretion in the matter. Admission norm being rigid, and known to the petitioner, cannot be heard, to say that equity lies in her favour. At the same time this Court exercise of writ jurisdiction cannot interfere with the eligibility norm prescribed by the University. In fact the Apex Court in a catena of decisions deprecated High Court''s extending private benevolence or misplaced sympathy to overcome the shortfall in the eligibility norm for admission to courses in educational institutions, thus subverting academic discipline, It is only the Apex Court in exercise of its extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 142, mere in the circumstances, Leniency if shown to the petitioner, it goes without saying must he offered, to all such candidates who are similarly placed as otherwise it would amount to invidious discrimination amongst the said, class of students, as opposed, to Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

The aforesaid judgment was rendered in the context of a student was secured 39.75% marks in the Pre-University being admitted to B.Sc., Nursing when the eligibility norms fixed by the University was 40%. The underlying principle is to prevent courts from showing any discretion contrary to the eligibility criteria prescribed by the Universities, which would amount, to subverting the academic discipline. In the instant case, the admission is not given to the B.Sc. nursing. The admission is to Post Graduate Course in Nursing. It is not a case where the candidate comes from the college seeking admission to P.G. Course alter obtaining Bachelor degree in. Nursing. She has worked 8 years and 3 months as Nurse, Alter obtaining permission from the concerned authority when she wanted to pursue post graduate course she sought for admission. She has secured 54.71% marks. In the aforesaid case unless the person secured 40%, he is not eligible to Bachelor decree in Nursing course. This is a case where the graduate in Nursing who has completed 8 years and 3 months service as a Nurse is seeking admission to Post Graduate course to enhance her ability and to improve her academic knowledge. Viewed from that angle, there is no question of standard prescribed by the University falling by such admission or it would have any effect of secured 40%, he is not eligible to Bachelor decree in Nursing course. This is a case where the graduate in Nursing who has completed 8 years and 3 months service as a Nurse is seeking admission to Post Graduate course to enhance her ability and to improve her academic knowledge. Viewed from that angle, there is no question of standard prescribed by the University falling by such admission or it would have any effect of subverting academic discipline to these post graduate course from in service candidates, may be in management-quota, there are not many applications as in the case of student seeking admission to Bachelor decree in Nursing, in this context, the learned Single Judge has looked, into the law of the point, referred, to textbooks and has passed the considered, order. In fact in this case justice has been done. It cannot be said that order passed is without jurisdiction. In that view of the matter, in appeal we decline to interfere with the discretion exercised by the learned Single Judge in rounding-off 54.71% into 55% and holding that she did possess qualification to be admitted to Post Graduate course. She has completed the course, she has taken the examination. Under these circumstances, we decline to entertain this appeal. Accordingly it is dismissed.

We make it clear that, this relief is granted only in peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, and shall not be treated as precedent.