Allahabad High Court
Pallavi Tiwari D/O Bhagwan Tiwari vs Union Of India Thru Ministry Of Human ... on 13 August, 2010
Author: Narayan Shukla
Bench: Narayan Shukla
Court No. - 3
Case :- MISC. SINGLE No. - 4541 of 2010
Petitioner :- Pallavi Tiwari D/O Bhagwan Tiwari
Respondent :- Union Of India Thru Ministry Of Human Resources
And Dev.
Petitioner Counsel :- Saket Misra
Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.,A.S.G.,S.P.Shukla,Vinay Bhushan
Hon'ble Shri Narayan Shukla,J.
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
I am informed that earlier few candidates filed writ petitions seeking permission for appearing in the entrance examination of B.Ed. course securing less than 50% marks and this Court issued direction to permit them to appear in the examination. The University permitted all the candidates including the petitioners to appear in the examination. Thereafter when the University did not declare their results, some of them again approached this Court by filing different writ petitions. This Court again issued direction to declare their results, pursuant to which the result of only those candidates who filed the writ petitions, have been declared. Now before me the other candidates who have been permitted to appear in the examination without order of court have come for the same very relief.
I take notice of the fact from the order passed by the Division Bench of this Court in Special Appeal No. 535 of 2010 that two candidates who secured less than 50% marks in graduation examination and under the order of this court appeared in B.Ed Entrance Examination, have secured marks more than the candidates who have obtained 50% or more marks in graduation which shows that there may be number of candidates who may secure more marks than the candidates who have been recognised eligible for appearing in the examination by fixing 50% cut off marks and I am also of the view that once the petitioners have been permitted to appear in the examination without order of the Court, definitely they are under legitimate expectation that their results shall be declared. I am informed that till date no counter affidavit has been filed in writ petition no. 2625 (M/S) of 2010, which order has been appealed. Mr. Vinay Bhushan, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel who appears for N.C.T.E. also submits that the counter affidavit has been prepared in writ petition no. 2625 of 2010 (M/S) and he will file the same by 16th August, 2010.
Learned counsel for the University informs that he has served copy of the counter affidavit prepared in writ petition no.4508 of 2010 (M/S) upon the petitioner, who is similarly situated person, but the same has not been filed in the court. If it is so, the petitioner is allowed to file rejoinder affidavit by the next date. I am informed that counselling is in progress and last date is fixed on 20.8.2010. I am of the view that if counselling is permitted to continue without adjudicating upon the right of the petitioners, since the seats in B.Ed. course are limited, after fulfilling the seats, their cause of action may be frustrated. Therefore, without interfering in the counselling at this stage, I feel it appropriate to issue an interim direction to the examining body to declare the result forthwith so that as per their rank in the merit list, they may appear in the counselling. It is further provided that the result of the counselling shall be subject to further order of this Court. Accordingly order is issued.
List on 16.8.2010 along with writ petition Nos. 2625 of 2010 (M/S), 4542 (M/S) of 2010, 4570 (M/S) of 2010, 4569 of 2010 (M/S), 4540 (M/S) of 2010, 4562 (M/S) of 2010, 4576 (M/S) of 2010, 4579 of 2010 (M/S), 4508 (M/S) of 2010, 4514 (M/S) of 2010, 4510 (M/S) of 2010,4513 (M/S) of 2010,4582 (M/S) of 2010, 4583 (M/S) of 2010, 4584 (M/S) of 2010, 4587 (M/S) of 2010, 4588 (M/S) of 2010, 4589 (M/S) of 2010, 4594 (M/S) of 2010, 4608 (M/S) of 2010 , 4611 (M/S) of 2010, 4616 (M/S) of 2010, 4623 of 2010 (M/S), 4625 (M/S) of 2010 and 4590 (M/S) of 2010.
Order Date :- 13.8.2010 GSY