The main legal point established in the judgment is that students cannot challenge the nature of the course and the pattern of examination after admission and participation, especially when they were aware of the new course and examination pattern.

ORDER :

1. As in all the three writ petitions, common questions are involved, therefore, they are being decided by this common order.

2. Petitioners have filed these writ petitions against the impugned notice dated 17.04.2023 and 26.04.2023 (Annexure P-4 & P-5) issued by respondent No.1 and also sought issuance of direction to the respondents to give impugned Ordinance No.197 dated 11.01.2023 prospective effect, whereby the minimum passing marks in semester exams have been enhanced to 40% instead of 33%.

3. Facts relevant for disposal of these petitions are that petitioners are students of respondent No.1-college, who took admission in B.Sc. under graduate course in the academic session 2022-23 and submitted their examination forms for B.Sc. 1st semester. Exam of 1st semester was conducted by respondent No.1- college in the month of December, 2022 and January, 2023 and thereafter the results were declared in the month of April, 2023. After declaration of results, petitioners came to know that minimum marks for passing the subjects was 40% instead of 33% which made petitioners to file these writ petitions.

4. Learned counsel for petitioners submits that petitioners after passing their higher secondary school examination in the year 2022, took admission in Bachelor of Science (B.Sc.) course at respondent No.1-college. Respondent No.1 is affiliated to Pt. Ravi Shankar Shukla University, Raipur. At the time of admission of petitioners, Revised Ordinance No.21 was prevailing, which was also provided to petitioners. In the Revised Ordinance No.21, information with respect to pattern in which the course is to run, exams are to be conducted, pattern of exams as well as the minimum marks required to pass each subjects and the semester is being provided. According to Clause - 8 of the Revised Ordinance No.21, every students/examinee has to obtain not less than 33% of the total marks in each subject/group of subjects and in the subject/group of subjects which includes both theory and practical examination, an examinee has to pass in both theory and practical examination separately. After admission of petitioners, respondent No.1 conducted 1st semester exam in December, 2022, which were in accordance with revised Ordinance No.21. After starting of 1st semester examination, respondent No.1 brought in the Ordinance No.197. According to Ordinance No.197, minimum passing marks was enhanced to 40% which was earlier 33% as per Ordinance No.21. The Ordinance No.197 though notified on 11.01.2023 was retrospectively applied to petitioners who got admitted and appeared in the examination according to Revised Ordinance No.21. It is contended that the ordinance which is brought at later point of time cannot be made applicable retrospectively without there being any specific clause or provision contained therein. In the Ordinance No.197 there is no mention of its applicability from retrospective date and therefore, if at all the Ordinance No.197 is to be applied to the course it would only be prospectively. He contended that results of the petitioners were declared on 17.04.2023 applying the Ordinance No.197 which is per-se illegal and arbitrary. It is the contention of learned counsel for petitioners that respondent No.1 vide its letter dated 26.04.2023 issued direction that passing marks for the 1st semester examination is to be 40% and not 33% as provided under the Revised Ordinance No.21 and brochure earlier provided to petitioners and on the same date it is further noticed that 1st and 2nd internal examinations to be held on 04.05.2023 and petitioners are not being allowed to appear in the said internal exams on the ground that they could not clear the 1st semester examination and they are required to repeat the same. The said information was supplied based on the Ordinance No.197, which came only after completion of 1st semester examination. He submits that the said decision of respondent No.1 and 2 of making the Ordinance No. 197 applicable to peti