Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Sajjan Shiksha Samiti,Jaipur vs State Of Raj & Ors on 15 February, 2011
Author: Mohammad Rafiq
Bench: Mohammad Rafiq
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR ORDER IN 1. S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.8929/2005 Sajjan Shiksha Samiti, Jaipur Vs. State of Rajasthan and Others AND 2. S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.9929/2006 Deepak Shah and Others Vs. Maharishi Dayanand Saraswati University, Ajmer and Others Date of Order ::: 15.02.2011 Present Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mohammad Rafiq Shri R.P. Garg, counsel for petitioner in Writ Petition No.8929/2005 Shri M.C. Jain, counsel for petitioners in Writ Petition No.9929/2006 Shri Ajeet Bhandari, counsel for Bar Council of India Shri N.S. Chauhan, counsel for respondent University #### By the Court:-
In both writ petitions, petitioners have challenged order passed by respondent Bar Council of India (for short, 'BCI') dated 20.10.2005 by which the BCI declined to affiliate Sajjan Law College, Pali, Rajasthan, on ground of various deficiencies. However, for students already admitted in said college, it was directed that Maharishi Dayanand Saraswati University, Ajmer (for short, 'MDS University') shall make arrangement and place them in other affiliated law college approved by BCI so that their career may not suffer.
This court by interim order dated 12.04.2007 directed said MDS University to allow 77 students of final year LL.B. examination of batch commencing from 2004-05 and also 25 students of 2nd year of batch commencing from 2005-06 to provisionally appear in the examination scheduled to start from 19.04.2007. It was further directed that their result may not be declared save with permission of this Court. Principal Secretary to Government in its Department of Higher Education, Government of Rajasthan, and Registrar of MDS University, Ajmer, were directed to take up the matter for corresponding increase intake capacity of Bangad Government Law College, Pali, so as to adjust and shift those students in that College, who have been allowed to provisionally appear in 2nd year examination of LL.B. Eventually, those two batches of 1st year and 2nd year were allowed to appear in the examination with Bangad Government Law College, Pali.
This court called for result of those students and subsequently passed order on 16.04.2008 directing MDS University to declare their result and also directed to allow them to prosecute their further studies in 2nd year and 3rd year LL.B. subject to outcome of writ petitions.
Now so far as students who were studying in 1st year and 2nd year at the time of passing of impugned order are concerned, they were shifted to Bangad Government Law College and there is no obvious objection by BCI in regard to those students. However, dispute now survives is only in respect of those students who appeared in final year examination of LL.B. pursuant to order passed by this court. This court on 16.12.2010 was informed that out of such 51 students, 15 could not qualify the examination and were required to appear in supplementary examination in Bangad Government Law College, however 36 students were declared pass. It was alleged that respondents BCI and MDS University are having different approach regarding these 36 students as compared to 15 students.
Shri N.S. Chauhan, learned counsel appearing for respondent MDS University, submits that only 13 students were required to appear in supplementary examination but out of those 13, only ten students appeared in supplementary examination.
Shri Ajeet Bhandari, learned counsel for respondent BCI, was required to inform the court about stand of BCI in this matter. He submits that as per his instructions the BCI has deferred consideration of this matter on account of fact that present writ petitions are subjudiced before this court.
Having regard to submissions made by learned counsel for BCI, both writ petitions are disposed of requiring petitioners to file a suitable representation before the Bar Council of India giving all details and particulars. The Bar Council of India may, in its discretion, decide such representation sympathetically having regard to circumstances the students are faced with and pass appropriate order as expeditiously as possible.
Both writ petitions stand disposed of.
(Mohammad Rafiq) J.
//Jaiman//