Punjab-Haryana High Court
Archana Saxena vs Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak ... on 22 August, 1988
Equivalent citations: AIR1989P&H189, AIR 1989 PUNJAB AND HARYANA 189
Author: M.M. Punchhi
Bench: M.M. Punchhi
JUDGMENT M.M. Punchhi, J.
1. The petitioner was a student of the Maharshi Dayanand University, Rohtak. She applied for admission in the M. Phil Course floated by the said University for the academic year 1988-89. Initially, she rubbed shoulders with respondent No. 3 claiming that she had a better right for admission in the said Course. Respondent No. 3 had sought admission on strength of being a ward of a University employee. That status gets weightage of 5 per cent. A candidate who has passed the qualifying examination from the said University also gets a weightage of 5 per cent. Respondent No. 3 OH the basis of these two weightages was being preferred over the petitioner. But as the return of the respondent-University goes, respondent No. 3 has not been given admission. So, the dispute regarding admission of respondent No. 3 is purely academic and we drop it at that.
2. In the return, however, it has been stated that one Kapoor Singh is being admitted on strength of his being a Sportsman. Being a Sportsman also, one fetches weightage of 5 per cent. The attack is thus transferred on Kapoor Singh on the same premises and now that dispute is what is the principle of computation of percentage.
3. According to Mr. R. P. Bali, learned counsel for the petitioner, 5 per cent weightage is to be given on the obtained percentage of marks in the qualifying examination. But according to Mr. J.L. Gupta, learned counsel for the University-respondent, 5 per cent marks are to be given on the total marks allotted in the qualifying examination. Mr. Bali supports his argument on the parallel available in the Diploma in Pharmacy Course in Medical College, Rohtak, affiliated to the M. D. University. Further, he says that giving weightage on the obtained percentage was sound as compared to the giving of 5 per cent weightage on the total marks.
4. It is obvious that weightages are given by the University to its students to further institutional preference a phenomenon which has come to stay. Yet the principle of fairness cannot be overlooked despite the element of competition existing in determining the added weightage. Both the contended principles, as it appears to us, are equally sound. There is something to say in Savour of weightage on the obtained percentage and equally there is something to be said in favour of the principle of percentage on total marks. If out of the two sound principles the University in its view has specifically chosen to opt for one (in its own way sounder) we see no room to interfere in the matter, all the more under Article 226 of the Constitution. Inevitably, we have to reject the contention of the petitioner despite the illustration given of following the other principle in a college affiliated to the University.
5. Lastly, it was contended by Mr. Bali that 10 per cent reservation for the teachers of the Colleges affiliated to the University in Haryana was bad. We are not called upon on the present set of facts to determine that question academically.
6. For the foregoing reasons, this petition fails and is hereby dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.