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

1996 Supreme(Gau) 181

GAUHATI HIGH COURT
D. N. CHOWDHURY, J.
Miss Lumbini Baruah -Appellant
Versus
Cotton College, Guwahati and others -Respondent
Civil Rule No. 3564 of 1996
Decided On : 20-08-1996

Advocates Appeared:
C. Baruah, N. K. Baruah and H. Barman, A. K. Bhattacharjee, K. Aggarwalla, Govt. Advocates, Assam

The right to education is a fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

Headnote:

EDUCATION - RIGHT TO EDUCATION - ADMISSION - WITHDRAWAL OF ADMISSION - PETITIONER ADMITTED TO 1ST YEAR SCIENCE COURSE IN COTTON COLLEGE, GUWAHATI ON THE BASIS OF HER APPLICATION AND MEDICAL CERTIFICATE - SUBSEQUENTLY, HER RESULT WAS WITHHELD ON THE GROUND THAT SHE OBTAINED ADMISSION BY SUBMITTING A FALSE MEDICAL CERTIFICATE - PETITIONER CHALLENGED THE WITHHOLDING OF HER RESULT AND THE REFUSAL TO ALLOW HER TO CONTINUE HER STUDIES - COURT HELD THAT THE COLLEGE AUTHORITIES ACTED WITHOUT APPLICATION OF MIND AND WITHOUT GIVING THE PETITIONER AN OPPORTUNITY TO DEFEND HERSELF - COURT DIRECTED THE COLLEGE AUTHORITIES TO DECLARE THE PETITIONER'S RESULT AND ALLOW HER TO CONTINUE HER STUDIES.

Fact of the Case:

Petitioner was admitted to the 1st Year Science course in Cotton College, Guwahati on the basis of her application and medical certificate. Subsequently, her result was withheld on the ground that she obtained admission by submitting a false medical certificate. Petitioner challenged the withholding of her result and the refusal to allow her to continue her studies.

Finding of the Court:

The Court held that the college authorities acted without application of mind and without giving the petitioner an opportunity to defend herself.

Issues: Whether the college authorities acted lawfully in withholding the petitioner's result and refusing to allow her to continue her studies.

Ratio Decidendi: The Court held that the right to education is a fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The Court further held that the college authorities had not applied their minds to the facts and circumstances of the case and had acted mechanically in withholding the petitioner's result and refusing to allow her to continue her studies. The Court also held that the college authorities had not given the petitioner an opportunity to defend herself against the allegations made against her.

Final Decision: The Court quashed the notice issued by the Dean of Cotton College, Guwahati, withholding the petitioner's result and the notice directing the departments not to enter the petitioner's name in the college register book. The Court also directed the college authorities to declare the petitioner's result and allow her to continue her studies.

Judgement

ORDER :- The matter relates to a premier educational institution of this part of the country which so far contributed as a centre of acquisition of knowledge.

2. The petitioner is presently studying in the First Year Science of Three Year Degree Course (TDC) in the Cotton College, Guwahati. After passing her All India Sr. School Certificate Examination (Class XII) in the year 1995, she was admitted in the First Year (Science) of TDC and was pursuing her studies with Zoology as major, with Botany, Anthropology and English. The final examination of 1st Year (Science) of the TDC of Cotton College was held in the month of March 1996 and the petitioner appeared in the said examination. On 23-3-96 while she was in the midst of her examination the petitioner was served with a notice from the office of the Dean of the Cotton College, Guwahati. By the said notice the petitioner along with another student was asked to produce their original mark sheets along with other relevant documents on the basis of which they were admitted to 1st Year (Science) of T.D.C. for the session 1995-96, before the Dean of Cotton College on or before 30-3-96. On receipt of the same notice the petitioner furnished her original mark sheet and other relevant documents mentioned before the Dean for verification. According to the petitioner after verification of the said documents in original the Dean returned the same to the petitioner. The Dean in her affidavit admitted that the petitioner produced her original mark-sheet and documents before 30-3-96, but asserted that the petitioner did not produce the original Medical Certificate, a copy of which was enclosed along with her application seeking admission in the T.D.C. 1st Year Science under physically handicapped quota.

3. The results of the 1st Year (Science) Examination for the year 1995-96 was declared in April 1996 by the college authorities in the Notice Board of the College and against the Roll No. of the petitioner it was shown "withheld for some official reasons". The petitioner has approached the authority. According to the petitioner she was informed that her results was withheld because of misplacing of some official files, and, however, she was assured that results will be cleared within a short time. From the month of July 96 the 2nd year classes resumed. The petitioner could not attend the 2nd year classes unless she is formally admitted after declaration of the results. The petitioner has asserted that she is, however, attending the classes. On the insistence of the father of the petitioner, he was furnished with a copy of the notice dated 17-7-96 issued by the respondent No. 2-The Dean of Cotton College, Guwahati. By the said notice it was intimated that the results of the petitioner along with another student was "withheld for some official reasons. The Heads of the concerned Departments are requested not to enter the names of the following students in the college register book. This may be treated as most important." The said notice was also circulated to all the Heads of Departments of the College and marked as Annexure E of the writ petition.

4. The petitioner failing to get redress from the college authority, she moved this court by way of Art. 226 of the Constitution.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner Mr. C. Baruah has submitted that the authorities in a most arbitrary fashion refused the petitioner her right to continue with her studies without assigning any reason. The denial to attend class and thereby denial to pursue her studies by the respondent authority amounts to deprivation of her liberty without affording any opportunity even to know the ground of the negation and the right to defend her reputation and dignity. According to Mr. Baruah, the petitioner was denied justice and fair play in action. Mr. A. K. Bhattacharyya, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the college authorities, submitted that the reasons fo











































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