IMPORTANT POINT
The main legal point established in the judgment is that a student should be allowed to complete a course if the University's objection to the admission arises after the completion of the course, especially when the University had prior knowledge of the student's qualifications and did not object at the beginning.

JUDGMENT :

(Jitendra Jain, J.) :

1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard the learned counsel for the Petitioner and the learned counsel for the Respondents.

2. By this Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioner has sought an appropriate writ directing Respondent No.1- University to issue mark-sheet for VI Semester of B.Sc. (IT) for academic year 2022-2023 and further declare the Petitioner as having successfully cleared the said course in the academic year 2022-2023.

Brief facts are as under :

3. In 2014, the Petitioner passed her Xth standard examination and got herself admitted for the course of Diploma in Electrical Engineering at Rustomjee Academy of Engineering, Thane. This course was for a period of two years and thereafter the Petitioner was granted a diploma by Maharashtra State Board of Vocational Education Examination. The Petitioner, thereafter on 20th September 2021 applied for B.Sc. (IT) degree course in Respondent No.2-College which was affiliated to Respondent No.1-University.

4. The Petitioner uploaded her application form on https://mumoa.digitaluniversity.ac/ApplicationStatus/Print Application. On 20th September 2021, an e-Suvidha ticket was generated from the said portal of the University. The Petitioner also filed a physical form with Respondent No.2-College under an ID allotted to her by Respondent No.1-University. In the application form uploaded on the portal of Respondent No.1-University the Petitioner gave details about her Xth standard examination and Diploma in Electrical Engineering. She uploaded her mark-sheet of diploma course on the said portal of the University. The Petitioner was admitted directly to 2nd year B.Sc. (IT) course and completed her III, IV, V and VI semester successfully.

5. On 25th July 2023, the Respondent No.1-University declared results of Semester VI and the Petitioner was declared as passed with a remark RPV. Being aggrieved by the said declaration of the result under remark RPV, the Petitioner has approached this Court for the relief mentioned hereinabove.

6. We have heard the learned counsel for the Petitioner and the learned counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 and 2 and with their assistance have perused the documents annexed to the Petition and also the Affidavit-in-replies filed by Respondent No.1-University and Respondent No.2-College.

7. There is no dispute that in September 2021, the Petitioner had uploaded her mark-sheet and application form on the portal of the Respondent No.1-University and an eSuvidha ticket was generated in her favour by the said portal of the University. The application form uploaded gave details of the Petitioner having cleared her Xth standard examination and Diploma in Electrical Engineering. The Petitioner thereafter completed her B.Sc. (IT) degree course from Respondent No.2-College which is affiliated to Respondent No.1-University. The Respondent No.1-University did not take any objection to the admission of the Petitioner on the ground that as per their ordinance the diploma course qualified for taking admission in degree course should be of three years and not two years. The Petitioner was allowed to keep her terms and appear in all the semesters and it is only at the time of declaring the results of the last semester i.e. VI Semester that a remark is made “RPV”. In our view, the Respondent No.1-University after having not objected to the admission of the Petitioner at the time of taking admission, but objecting at the time of completion of the course would be unfair and unreasonable. If the Respondent No.1-University felt that she was not qualified to take admission in the degree course then same ought to have being informed to her at the very beginning of her admission and not after completion of the course.

8. The Respondent No.1-University in reply took a stand that Respondent No.2-College had not uploaded the document and therefore sought to justify their action. In our view, admittedly the Petition