Karnataka High Court
Nageeb Abdulqader Bamatraf vs The University Of Mysore And Ors. on 21 September, 1988
Equivalent citations: AIR1989KANT302, 1989(1)KARLJ36
ORDER
1.This petition was adjourned from time to time after hearing the parties in order to ascertain whether a pass in the subject known as Commercial Kannada is necessary for taking a degree in the B.B.M. Course of the Mysore University. B. B. M. Course is an acronym for Bachelor of Business Management.
2. The petitioner is a student and a foreign national from South Yemen and his grievance is that as the University does not teach Kannada in the B.B.M. Course, the University cannot insist on a student, that too a foreign student, to obtain a pass in Commercial Kannada. The Kannada book prescribing the syllabus for the examination is also produced before me and what this Court could gather from that book is that the person who seeks to obtain a degree in the said course must have a working knowledge of Kannada, that is to say Commercial Kannada, to put it in other words, so that he would be in a position to correspond in Kannada in regard to the business matters when he actually starts practising in business management. The prayer of the petitioner is that since Kannada is not a compulsory subject in the University, it is impossible for him to obtain a pass in that subject and therefore, the University should be directed to amend the regulations prescribing commercial Kannada as one of the subjects for acquiring the B. B. M. degree.
3. The learned counsel for the University has filed its return and has contended that this subject is a compulsory subject not only for the petitioner whose mother-tongue is not Kannada but for any number of other candidates whose mother tongue is not Kannada. It is mentioned in the return filed by the University that one student from West Bengal whose mother-tongue is obviously not Kannada and who did not have any knowledge of Kannada had taken a First Class in the subject and, therefore, any student can pass in this subject before he completes the course. There is yet another fact and that is the carry over system as permitted by this University so that a student can go on to the next year and only before he completes the final year he is expected to pass the examination in Commercial Kannada.
4. Learned counsel for the University has furnished an extract of the marks pertaining to the foreign students who had taken examination in this subject and passed the same. One such candidate is Nabith Fadl Allhadad bearing Registration No. 15315 and another such candidate is Ibrahim Khaled Ukasha Numan - bearing Registration No. 15306 and both are Palestine Nationals (Jordan). They had taken the examination held in April 1987. However, it is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that these foreign candidates have passed the subject in question by parting with some money to the examiners. The allegation cannot be investigated by this Court while considering the case of the petitioner. The University could hold the necessary enquiry and satisfy itself that the degrees conferred by it are not tainted by any illegal gratification and other corrupt practices.
5. In these circumstances, it is not proper for this Court to interfere with the academic standards to be maintained by the University by insisting on the, candidates to pass in the, subject prescribed in terms of the relevant regulation. Therefore, there is no merit in this petition.
6. Accordingly, this petition is dismissed.
7. No costs.
8. Petition dismissed