Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

               Academic Year     Semesters
   



                   2012-13                  Ist & IInd Semester
                   2013-14                 IIIrd & IVth Semester
                   2014-15                 Vth & VIth Semester





                   2015-16                VIIth & VIIIth Semester

3. However it appears that academically there were quite some failures affecting the normal pursuit of the course. As can be seen from the petition, during the first year the Petitioner In December 2012, appeared for the first semester and failed in one subject namely Pvr 4 WP4401.16.doc in 'Applied Chemistry' which she reappeared and cleared in the examination held in May,2013. Also in May 2013, she appeared for the second semester examination and in which she failed in one subject namely 'Applied Mathematics'. Thereafter, the Petitioner was granted admission to the Second Year (IIIrd and IVth Semesters), for the academic year 2013-14. In November 2013, the Petitioner appeared in the 'Applied Mathematics' paper of the Second Semester in which she again failed. Thereafter, she again appeared in May 2014 in the said backlog paper but failed in this third attempt.

5. What is relevant for the purpose of the present case is the eligibility of the Petitioner for admission to the Third year (i.e. Semester V and VI) on account of the Petitioner not passing Semester II examination upto May 2014, when the Petitioner had approached for admission to the third year of the course.

6. It appears that nonetheless the petitioner was granted admission to the 3rd year (Vth & VIth Semester) by Respondent No. 1 college, despite the petitioner not clearing the backlog in the subject of Applied Mathematics of the IInd Semester, as per the requirement of Ordinance 3709. The Petitioner was also permitted to keep terms Pvr 6 WP4401.16.doc (A.T.K.T.) as she had also failed in some subjects in the IIIrd and IVth Semesters which she cleared later during the academic year. However, the fact remains that although the Petitioner appeared for III and IV semester examination upto May,2015, the Petitioner did not clear the backlog/failed subject of the II semester (applied mathematics). It was only in November, 2015 when the Petitioner reappeared for the IInd semester, backlog paper in 'Applied Mathematics' she cleared the same.

9. On the other hand, the learned Counsel for the University would submit that the provisions of Ordinance No.3709 are clearly attracted in the present case, inasmuch as the Petitioner who had failed in the subject applied mathematics of the IInd semester - First Year which she attempted for the first time in May,2013, was not cleared by the Petitioner upto November,2015. Relying on the ordinance it is submitted that unless this backlog of the II semester was cleared by the Petitioner, the Petitioner could not have been permitted by the College to appear for the V and VI semester examination. It is submitted that it was a legal obligation on the part of the College to adhere to the norms, rules/ ordinances of the University in permitting the candidates to appear for the examination. It is submitted that Vth and VIth semester examination are undertaken by the concerned colleges and only the Ist and the IInd semester (First Year of the course) and the VIIth and VIIIth semester examinations (Fourth Year of the Course) are conducted by the University. It is therefore, submitted that it was the fault of Respondent No.1 College in permitting the Petitioner to Pvr 9 WP4401.16.doc appear for the Vth and VIth semester examination, when under the said Ordinance the Petitioner was clearly barred from being admitted to the Vth and VIth semester (Third year) for not having cleared the backlog of the II semester. The learned Counsel for Respondent No.1 College has also conceded to this position and supported the submissions as made on behalf of the University. Learned counsel for the College has drawn our attention to a Chart which gives a birds eye view of the academic pursuit of the petitioner for the said course, which categorically demonstrates that the admission of the petitioner for the third year (Vth and VIth semester) was a provisional admission as the petitioner had failed in three subjects of the IVth semester and also had a backlog of the IInd Semester.

The facts in the case in hand thus are completely different.

Indisputedly, the admission of the Petitioner was provisional for the Third Year Court (V and VI semester). Further the petitioner admittedly had a un-cleared backlog of the Semester II, when she approached for admission for the third year admission ( Vth and VIth semester) in the academic year 2014-15. In fact, the backlog was cleared after the academic year 2014-15 was over i.e. in November,2015. The petitioner therefore, clearly was not eligible for admission to the Vth and VIth semester for the academic year 2014-15. Further this admission was not made by the University as in the Kurukshetra's case. Her appearances for the Vth and VIth semester were therefore, wholly invalid and this position appears to be fairly accepted by the Petitioner looking at the prayers as made in the Writ Petition.