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 1, Cited by 0]

Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur

Paras Kanwar vs Jai Narain Vyas University & Ors on 11 January, 2017

Author: Sandeep Mehta

Bench: Sandeep Mehta

     HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
                      JODHPUR
               S.B.Civil Writ Petition No. 8847 / 2009
Paras Kanwar, aged about 28 years, D/o Shri Prtihvi Singh, by
caste Charan, resident of Village Chhindiya, Tehsil - Bhopalgarh,
Distt.-Jodhpur (Raj.)

                                                         ----Petitioner
                                Versus
  1. Jai Narain Vyas University, Jodhpur through,

     Coordinator/convener, PTET, 2009, J.N.V.U., Jodhpur (Raj.).

  2. The Principal, Vaidanti Shiksha Mahavidhyalaya, Gayatri

     Mandir Road, Degana, District Nagaur, (Raj.).

  3. The State of Rajasthan, through the Secretary, Department

     of Higher Education, Secretariat, Jaipur.

                                                     ----Respondent
_____________________________________________________
For Petitioner(s)   :   Mr.Narpat Singh.

For Respondent(s) :     Mr.P.R.Singh.

_____________________________________________________
           HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP MEHTA

Judgment / Order 11/01/2017 By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has approached this Court challenging the action of the respondents in rejecting her candidature for B.Ed. Course in the Session 2009-10. The petitioner succeeded in the written examination whereafter, the respondents rejected the petitioner's candidature vide order (Annex.9) intimating that she was not having 12 th standard marksheet and thus, could not be admitted into the Course.

Shri Narpat Singh learned counsel for the petitioner referred (2 of 3) [CW-8847/2009] to the guidelines (Annex.12) and urged that a candidate having secured 45% marks in aggregate in the bachelors course was qualified for the purpose of admission into the B.Ed. Course. The Rules for admission nowhere require that the candidate should be having 12th standard marksheet as well. The petitioner had done the BAP Course and thereafter, she acquired the degree of graduation from the Vardhman Open University, Kota and as such, she was without doubt, eligible for being admitted into the B.Ed. Course. He thus prays that the writ petition should be allowed and the respondents should be directed to be afforded admission to the petitioner in the B.Ed. Course for the corresponding year.

Per contra, Shri P.R.Singh learned counsel for the respondents has drawn attention of the Court to the instructions issued for the PTET (B.Ed.) Course 2009 whereunder, the applicants were required to furnish the marksheets of 10 th standard, 12th standard, 1st year, 2nd year and 3rd year of the graduation courses and post graduation course if so. He submits that all these marksheets were essentially required as qualifying conditions for being admitted into the Course. The petitioner admittedly did not hold the 12th standard marksheet and thus, she was rightly denied admission vide the order (Annex.9).

I have heard the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the material available on record.

The instructions to candidates which constitute the essential conditions of admission clearly required that the applicant should furnish marksheets of 10th standard, 12th standard, 1st year, 2nd (3 of 3) [CW-8847/2009] year and 3rd year of the graduation courses and post graduation course if so at the time of admission. The petitioner admittedly was not having the 12th standard marksheet because she never underwent the said course.

In this background, the respondents were perfectly justified in denying admission to the petitioner in the B.Ed. Course in the questioned admission process. The impugned order (Annex.9) dated 27.7.2009 ex-facie does not suffer from any illegality or irregularity nor the same can be termed to be contrary to the conditions of admission guidelines so as to require interference in exercise of the extraordinary writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

Consequently, the writ petition being devoid of any merit is hereby rejected.

In case, the respondents have not reimbursed the admission fees deposited by the petitioner, then the same shall be done forthwith and not later within a period of two months from today.

(SANDEEP MEHTA)J. /tarun/