Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Vineet S Loni S/O Siddharam Loni vs Visvesvaraya Technological ... on 12 January, 2023

                            1




           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

                   KALABURAGI BENCH

       DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2023

                         BEFORE

  THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANANT RAMANATH HEGDE

             W.P.No.200068/2023 (EDN-EX)

BETWEEN:

VINEET S. LONI S/O SIDDHARAM LONI
AGE: 30 YEARS OCC: STUDENT,
R/O: BEHIND KSRTC WORKSHOP GYANG BOUDI
TQ: & DIST: VIJAYAPUR
USN NO.2BL10CS079.                  .... PETITIONER

(BY SRI. SANDEEP VIJYAKUMAR, ADVOCATE)


AND:

01.    VISVESVARAYA TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY
       SANTEBASTEWAD ROAD MACHE,
       BELGAUM-590018.
       BY ITS REGISTRAR.

02.    BLDE ASSOCIATION'S
       VACHANA PITAMAHA
       DR. P.G. HALAKATTI COLLEGE OF
       ENGINEERING & TECHNOLOGY
       VIJAYAPUR-596 101.
       REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL.   ... RESPONDENTS

(BY SRI. SUDARSHAN M., ADVOCATE FOR R1
SRI. D. P. AMBEKAR, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
                                      2




      THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226

AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO A)

QUASH       THE    V.T.U.        REF.NO.VTU/BGM/ACA-OS-CIR/2021-

22/1708 DATED 29.07.2021, PERTAINING TO THE DEGREE OF

BACHELOR OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY, THE COPY OF

WHICH IS AT ANNEXURE-A AS VIOLATIVE OF ARTICLE 14 OF

THE   CONSTITUTION          OF    INDIA,      B)   ISSUE    A   WRIT   OF

MANDAMUS, DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO.1 HEREIN TO

CONSIDERED THE REPRESENTATION DATED 25.12.2022 AS PER

ANNEXURE-D AND ETC.,

      THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING

IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-

                                  ORDER

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents.

02. The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking writ of certiorari to quash the Annexure-A notification dated 29.07.2021 and also seeks a writ of mandamus to consider his representation at Annexure-D where he is seeking permission of the university to appear for the examination.

3

03. Annexure-A is the notification where the first respondent - university has taken a decision to extend the time prescribed for the students to clear the examination. The notification is applicable for those students who have taken admission in the academic years 2009-2010 and 2010-2011 for Bachelor of Engineering and Technology courses and also time is extended for the students who have taken lateral admission for Bachelor Technology course in the academic year 2011-2012 and 2012-2013. The time to clear the examination is extended by 02 years. In terms of said notification, two more consecutive additional attempts to clear the subjects were permitted in July -2021 and January - 2022. This concession is granted only to the students who have completed the course of eight semesters. Admittedly, the petitioner has not completed the eight semesters.

04. This Court is of the view that the relief sought to quash Annexure-A does not come to rescue of the petitioner. Moreover, in a matter relating to extension of 4 time period to complete the course, the university is the competent authority to take the appropriate decision. This Court cannot intervene in such matter. This Court does not have power to direct the university to extend the time, when the power to fix the time or extend the time to clear the backlog is with the University.

05. As for as Annexure-D is concerned it is always open for the university to consider the application of the petitioner where he seeks extension of time to appear for the examination to clear the backlog. The university may take appropriate decision on that application and shall issue endorsement in this regard preferably within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

06. The said excise shall be completed adhering to the timeline fixed by this Court, so as to give a clear picture to the petitioner as to where he stands as far as the prayer under Annexure-D representation is concerned. 5

07. With these observations, the writ petition is allowed in part.

Sd/-

JUDGE KJJ