Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Sonia Choudhury vs Jadavpur University & Ors on 10 January, 2012
Author: Tapen Sen
Bench: Tapen Sen
1
10/01/2012
ARDR
WP 487 (W) of 2012
Sonia Choudhury
Vs.
Jadavpur University & Ors.
Mr. Arabinda Chatterjee,
Mr. Soumyen Datta,
Mr. Gautam Dey, ...... for the Petitioner.
Mr. S.L. Hazra,
...for the University.
Mr. Sumit Panja,
Mr. Taraprasad Haldar,
....for the Respondent no.3.
In view of the determination given by the Hon'ble the Chief Justice, this matter was mentioned by Mr. Chatterjee, learned counsel representing the writ petitioner, student of J.D. Birla Institute.
Mr. Chatterjee submits that the writ petitioner was not allowed to appear at the interview/examination nor she was allowed to fill up the forms and in case the examination is over, his client will suffer irreparable loss and prejudice and one year would be lost. It was submitted that only on last Friday petitioner got intimation about the refusal. It was submitted by Mr. Chatterjee at this moment his prayer is to allow his client to fill up the forms and to get the admit card and further allow the writ petitioner to appear at the examination. However, he submits that at the time of hearing of the main matter, he will submit the prejudice caused and the violation that takes place for the actions of the respondents/university authority as well the institute being the respondent no.2.
2Mr. Panja, learned counsel representing the respondent no.3/Principal of the J.D. Birla Institute, submits that under no circumstances, the writ petitioner should be allowed to sit in the examination. He further submits that the examination has already been started. It was submitted by him that the students should not get this type of opportunities. He further submits that unless the back papers of the concerned examination are cleared off by the writ petitioner, they should not be allowed to sit in the examination and in the event the interim prayer is allowed, this will create a bad precedent.
Mr. Hazra, learned counsel representing the Jadavpur University, submits that the writ petitioner is not entitled to appear at the interview as per the rules and regulations of the University and no leniency should be shown in favour of the petitioner.
Heard and considered the case of the petitioner as well as Mr. Chatterjee, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as also the respective counsel appearing for the parties.
It appears to this Court that this Court is taking up this matter on temporary assignment for the day only. It is not possible for this Court to hear the entire matter upon giving opportunity of hearing to any of the parties and decide it finally. It, prima-facie, appears that interest of justice would be served if an interim order is passed directing the Institute to allow the petitioner to fill up the forms in course of the day (10/1/2012) itself and the forms be sent to the University, upon completion of all formalities, by tomorrow (11/1/2012) and the University is 3 directed to issue admit card for allowing the petitioner to appear at the examination only without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the University as well as the Institute, no prejudice would cause to any of the parties.
I direct the Institute to allow the writ petitioner to fill up the forms in course of the day itself and the Institute, after the receiving the forms, should immediately send the same to the University. The University authorities are directed to issue admit card to the petitioner in course of tomorrow (11/1/2012) so that the petitioner can appear in the examination. This order is without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties. However, it is made clear that the examination papers of the petitioner should be kept in a sealed cover. It need not be sent to any examiner or assessing authority for valuing the papers and/or awarding marks. The entire matter would be considered at the time of final hearing and everything would abide by the final result of the writ petition.
The Institute as well as the Jadavpur University will act on the communication of the learned Advocate-on-Record for the petitioner and the steps are to be taken expeditiously so that the petitioner can appear at the examination on Thursday (12/1/2012).
Let photostat plain copy of this order, duly counter-signed by the Assistant Registrar (Court), be given to the learned Advocates for the appearing parties on usual undertakings.
(Ashoke Kumar Dasadhikari, J.) 4