SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2003 Supreme(Pat) 342

NARAYAN ROY
Lovely Kumari – Appellant
Versus
Bhupendra Narayan Mandal University – Respondent


Judgment

1. Heard counsel for the parties.

2. This writ application has been filed for issuance of a direction upon the Respondents-University to publish the result of B.Sc. Mathematics (Hons).

3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner appeared in B.Sc. (Hons) examination held in 2000 to clear B.Sc. Part-Ill course and she also appeared for one paper of Part-II and she has passed the examination but the University authorities are not publishing her result, saying that the petitioner could not have appeared in one examination to clear two courses as per rule 7.1 of the Regulation of the University.

4. Learned counsel for the University submits that the result of the petitioner has not been published as she has appeared in one examination to clear part-III course examination and also one paper of Part-II.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner now submits that this question was gone into by this Court in the case of Akhtar Alam vs. B.N.Mandal University and ors. 2003 (1) PLJR page 28 and this Court considering the facts and circumstances of the case held that on principle of equity the result of the petitioner is required to be published even though t

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top