Priyanka Singh v. University of Delhi

Delhi High Court · 14 Dec 2018 · 2018:DHC:7908
C. Hari Shankar
W.P.(C) 12944/2018
2016 SCC Online Del 1949
administrative petition_dismissed Significant

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court dismissed the petition seeking permission to appear in a university examination beyond the prescribed time limit, reaffirming the binding nature of university ordinances on examination eligibility.

Full Text
Translation output
W.P.(C) 12944/2018
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Decision: 14th December, 2018
W.P.(C) 12944/2018
MS. PRIYANKA SINGH ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Jagdish Kumar Solunki, Adv.
VERSUS
UNIVERSITY OF DELHI AND ANR. ..... Respondents
Through: Mr. Mohinder J. S. Rupal and Ms. Slomita Rai, Advs. for University of
Delhi
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR
J U D G E M E N T (ORAL)
14.12.2018
JUDGMENT

1. The petitioner was admitted for the three-year B.Com (Hons.) course in Delhi University in the Laxmi Bai College in July, 2012. She has been unable to clear one of her papers i.e. Business Mathematics till date. The writ petition is predicated on the premise that the period of completion for clearing the said papers is six years. “which shall expire on 31st December, 2018” (as averred in para 3 of the writ petition). On the basis of the such premise, the writ petition seeks issuance of a writ of mandamus to the respondents to allow the petitioner to appear in her Business Mathematics paper, in 2018.

2. Mr. Rupal, learned counsel appearing for the University, submits that the petitioner’s request cannot be granted, as the 2018:DHC:7908 applicable provisions of the acts, statutes ordinances governing the University permit a student to appear as a candidate, in the examination, only within a period of six years from the year of admission in the first semester. Specifically, Clause 2 of Ordinance

(viii) applicable to the University may be reproduced thus: “(2) Subject to the provisions of sub-clause (1) above, no person shall be admitted as a candidate for the examinations noted below after the lapse of period specified against each examination: B.A. (Pass) Part III Six years after admission to the first year class and five years after admission to the II year Class. B.Com.(Pass) Part III -do-

B. Sc. (General) Part III Six years after admission to the I Year
B. Sc. (Hons.) Part III Five years after
B. Sc. (Home Science) Six years after admission to the 1 Year

Class. B.A.(Hons.)/B.Com. Five years after (Hons.) Part III admission to the 1 Year Class and four years B.A.(Hons.) Music -do- Bachelor of Fine Arts (Painting) (Sculpture) (Applied Art) Seven years after of the Course. M.Sc., M.D., M.S. in the Faculty of Medical Sciences. submission of thesis for the Course M.Ch., D.M., in the Faculty of Medical Sciences of the Course M.A. (Final) M.A., M.Com. Four years after admission to the M.A.(Previous) or M.A. Class, as the case may be. Master of Business Administration (Full- Time) Four years after admission to the I year Master of Business Administration (Part- Time)

3. As the petitioner had secured admission in the B.Com (Hons.) course in July, 2012, the afore-mentioned period of six years would come to an end in July, 2018, so she, quite obviously, cannot be allowed to appear in the paper in December, 2018.

4. This issue, I may note, is not res integra, as it stands concluded by the judgment of a single bench of this Court in Avdhesh kumar v. Delhi University 2016 SCC Online Del, 1949.

5. Mr. Rupal also submits that the SLP, preferred against the decision of this Court, also stands dismissed by the Supreme Court.

6. Accordingly, it is not possible for this Court to grant the relief, sought in the writ petition.

7. This writ petition is dismissed with no orders as to costs.

C. HARI SHANKAR, J

DECEMBER 14, 2018 bh