Back
2004 Supreme(Cal) 155
High Court Of Calcutta
Bhaskar Bhattacharya
MADHUMITA DAS - Appellant
Versus
UNIVERSITY OF CALCUTTA AND ORS - Respondent
W. P. 18448w Of 2003
Decided On : 03/01/2004
DIPANKAR DUTTA, Rajib Kumar Basak, S.K.Patra
Headnote:
WRIT - MANDAMUS - ARTICLE 226 - EDUCATION - RIGHT TO - ARTICLE 14 AND 16 - VIOLATION OF - CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION (CBSE) - PATRACHAR VIDYALAYA - STUDENTS - ADMISSION IN UNIVERSITY OF CALCUTTA - DENIAL OF - REASONABLENESS - HELD, DENIAL OF ADMISSION TO STUDENTS WHO PASSED SENIOR SCHOOL CERTIFICATE EXAMINATION FROM CBSE AS PATRACHAR VIDYALAYA IS VIOLATIVE OF ARTICLES 14 AND 16 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a student of LL.B. Course in the Jogesh Chowdhury Law College under Calcutta University, filed a writ petition praying for a declaration that the circular prohibiting registration of students under the University of Calcutta, who passed Senior School Certificate examination from Central Board of Secondary Education through patrachar Vidyalaya, is violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the constitution of India and accordingly be struck down; a writ of and/or in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to forthwith revoke/set aside/cancel the order of the respondent No. 2 which was communicated to the petitioner; issue a writ of and/or in the nature mandamus directing the respondents concerned to give registration number to the petitioner as a student of University of Calcutta forthwith; issue a writ of and / or in the nature mandamus directing the respondents concerned to issue mark-sheets of Part-I, Part-III and Part IV LL.B. examinations to the petitioner forthwith; issue a writ of and/or in the nature of certiorari directing the respondents concerned to transmit and authenticate the records of the case so that conscionable Justice may be rendered upon the petitioner upon hearing the parties.
Finding of the Court:
The Court held that the decision of the University to debar candidate of Patrachar category from getting admission in University was violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the constitution of India as by appearing at the selfsame examination, other students, who have even obtained lesser amount of marks, are given admission. Such restriction is not even imposed upon private Students and students sponsored by adult schools although those students do not attend classes in any school and are similarly placed with patrachar students.
Issues: Whether the decision of the University to debar Patrachar Vidyalaya students from registering as a student in the University when the University allows private students and the students sponsored by 'adult schools' is violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court held that there is no intelligible differentia that distinguishes a patrachar Student from the students of private categories or students sponsored by adult school who are similarly placed with Patrachar Students. The regular students who even fail in those three internal subjects can get pass certificate after the expiry of one year from the date of publication of result. At this stage, it may be also mentioned here that a Patrachar student must pass Secondary Examination of 10 years duration as a regular student in order to appear as Patrachar Student. The only difference is that the regular students are attending two further years in a regular school whereas Patrachar students are not required to undergo their studies in a recognized school for those two years.
Final Decision: The Court allowed the writ petition, directed the University authority to register the name of the petitioner and to publish the result of the petitioner of Part I, Part III and Part IV examinations of LL.B. Examination within fortnight from the date of judgement. The decision to debar Patrachar student is struck down as violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.
( 1 ) THE judgment of the Court was as follows : by this writ application, the petitioner, a student of LL. B. Course in the Jogesh Chowdhury Law College under Calcutta University has prayed for the following reliefs: (A) A declaration that the circular as disclosed in Annexure P- 10 to this application, which prohibits registration of students under the University of Calcutta, who passed Senior School Certificate examination from Central Board of Secondary Education through patrachar Vidyalaya, is violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the constitution of India and accordingly be struck down ; (B) A Writ of and/or in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to forthwith revoke/set aside/cancel the order of the respondent No. 2 which was communicated to the petitioner vide letter No. ADM/ce/0/2003 dated 26. 9. 2003; (C) Issue a writ of and/or in the nature mandamus directing the respondents concerned to give registration number to your petitioner as a student of University of Calcutta forthwith; (D) Issue a writ of and / or in the nature mandamus directing the respondents concerned to issue mark-sheets of Part-I, Part-III and Part IV LL. B. examinations to your petitioner forthwith; (E) Issue a writ of and/or in the nature of certiorari directing the respondents concerned to transmit and authenticate the records of the case so that conscionable Justice may be rendered upon your petitioner upon hearing the parties. (F) Issue rule NISI in terms of prayer (A), (B) and (C); (G) Pass an interim order directing the respondents concerned to issue provisional mark-sheets to your petitioner of Part-I, Part-III and Part IV LL. B. Examinations till the disposal of the application; (H) And ad interim order in terms of prayer (D); (I) Pass any other or further order or orders, as Your Lordships may deem fit and proper. "
( 2 ) ). The facts giving rise to filing of the present writ application can be summed up thus :-A) The petitioner passed Senior School Certificate Examination from the Central Board of Secondary Education ("cbse") in the year 1992 as a student of "patrachar Vidyalaya" category and the CBSE gave migration certificate to the petitioner declaring "no objection" in her joining any recognized college or institution or taking examination of any University or Board established by law. B) In the year 1997, the petitioner enrolled herself in the faculty of law al Jogesh Chowdhury Law College under the University of calcutta in LL. B. Course of five years. C) After her admission in the said College, the petitioner submitted all the required documents including migration certificate for the purpose of registering her name in the University of Calcutta, and accordingly the college authority sent all those documents to the University. D) The petitioner appeared in Part-I LL. B. Examination and prior to that admit card was issued to her wherein the registration number was mentioned as "pending". E) The mark-sheet of Part-I LL. B. Examination was however, not issued to the petitioner and according to her, the College authority informed her that as her registration was pending, the mark-sheet was withheld. The college authority, however, permitted her to fill up the form for appearing at the Part-II examination and consequently, admit card was issued and she not only appeared at the examination but also passed Part-II examination as would appear from the mark- sheet issued by the University. F) Thereaftrer, the petitioner appeared at the Part-III examination and it will appear from the admit card that the registration number was even then shown to be "pending". The petitioner asserts that although she passed in such examination but mark-sheet was not issued and the University assured her that the same would be issued along with the mark-sheet of Part-IV examination. G) The petitioner, however, was permitted to appear at the part-IV examination but ultimately the mark-sheet of such examination has not been is
