The main legal point established in the judgment is that the petitioner's eligibility to appear in the 6th Semester Examination was determined based on the attendance requirement under Ordinance VII.

JUDGMENT

Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav, J. (Oral)

1. The petitioner has filed the instant petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking directions against respondent No.2/College for the issuance of admit card and to further allow her to appear in the 6th Semester Examination which had commenced from 11.05.2019.

2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner states that the petitioner is a meritorious student studying in the respondent No.2/College and is pursuing B.A.(Hons) English course and was to appear in her final examination i.e. 6th Semester Examination. However, on account of the shortage of attendance, the admit card was not issued to her. She states that as per the Ordinance of respondent No.1/University, the attendance in the 6th Semester required was 66.66 per cent and if the benefit of certain other clauses of the Ordinance is given to her, she would be eligible to appear in the examination. She also states that the respondent No.1/University earlier considered her attendance up to 63.01 per cent, however, later on, the respondent No.1/University indicates that the petitioner had attended up to 60.84 per cent classes.

3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner further states that by way of an interim order dated 10.05.2019, while recording the prima facie finding in her favour, this court directed the respondent No.1/University to allow the petitioner to appear in the examination, however, it was further directed not to declare the result, but it appears that the respondent No.1/University, inadvertently declared the result of the petitioner. She further states that once the result of the petitioner has already been declared, the same should be validated and at this stage, i..e. after passing the of more than four years, she should not be asked to appear in the 6th Semester Examination again.

4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No.1/University and the respondent No.2/College, vehemently oppose the prayer and they state that the present writ petition is misconceived. According to them, the petitioner attended classes only up to 60.84 per cent and therefore, in accordance with the Ordinance, the petitioner cannot be allowed to take the benefit of the interim order as the same was passed on the basis of equity and without creating any right in favour of the petitioner.

5. I have heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties and perused the record.

6. A perusal of the interim order dated 10.05.2019 indicates that various facts have been recorded by this court, including the position under the applicable Ordinance VII. In paragraph No.10 it has been noted that the petitioner's attendance works out to be 63.63 per cent on consideration of certain aspects as have been indicated therein. Paragraph No.10 to 15 are reproduced as under:

"10. In order to demonstrate this, learned counsel has drawn my attention to Annexure A-6 to the writ petition, which contains the list of the detained students, for the academic year 2018-19. A perusal of the entries relating to the name of the petitioner as contained therein, indicate that (i) up to the 5th Semester, the petitioner had attended 674 lectures out of 1068, (ii) in the 6th Semester she attended 129 lectures out of 261, (iii) resultantly, therefore, if all the 6th Semesters put together, the petitioner had attended 803 lectures out of 1329 (iv) the petitioner was given allowance of 67 lectures on medical grounds, (v) as a result, the petitioner's attendance would be reckoned as 803 out of 1262 which works out to 63.62%.

11. Learned counsel for the petitioner states, on instructions from his client who is present in court, that the figures of 164 and 129, in the said table, a readable copy of which has been separately filed at page 127 of the paper book, represent the actual number of classes attended by the petitioner in the first five semesters and in the 6th Semester, respectively, without including the cl