The court held that the University's rules requiring a character certificate from a Judge, a First Class (Stipendiary) Magistrate, the Principal of a first-grade Degree College of a recognized University, or the Registrar of a University were mandatory and could not be disregarded by the University authorities.

Tek Chand, J.

1. This is a Letters Patent Appeal from the judgment of learned Single Judge preferred by Professor M. Ramaswamy in the Faculty of Law in the University of Delhi, Professor L. R. Sivasubramanian, Dean of the Faculty of law, and Dr. C. D. Deshmukh, Vice-Chancellor of the Dellhi University, against Miss Manju Bakhru, under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent of this Court. A writ petition (Civil Writ No. 518-D of 1962) was presented to this Court in which the petitioner stated that she had obtained the Degree of the Bachelor of Arts from the Punjab University. Examination was held in April, 1991, and she appeared as a private candidate securing 203 out of 500 marks. She applied for admission to the LL.B. (Previous) class (1962-3) of the Faculty of Law of the University of Delhi. On 30th of June, 1962, at about 11.00 A.M. the requisite application form was submitted along with the required certificates. As per "Bulletin of Information" (1962-63) and "Instructions to Applicant" (1962-63), published and issued by the Faculty of law, she was required to produce a number of certificates along with her application form for admission. According to "Bulletin of Information", page 7, a candidate admitted to the LL.B. (Previous) was also required to produce a character certificate, the relevant instruction proceeded as under:

"Those who have passed the last examination privately without undergoing a regular course of study in any recognised University, College, or Institution, but who are not in Government service, should produce, in original, along with the application form for admission, a character certificate from a Judge or a First-Class (stipendiary) Magistrate, or the Principal of a first-grade Degree College of a recognised University, or the Registrar of a University,....."

The petitioner, among other certificates, had also produced along with her application form for admission a character certificate in original signed by Shri V. N. Bhatia, Joint Secretary and Draftsman to the Government of India, Ministry of Law, and countersigned by Shri M. M. Aggarwal, a First Class (Stipendiary) Magistrate of Delhi. The certificate of Shri Bhatia states that Miss Manju Bakhru daughter of Shri Chandiram Bakhru is known to him well for the last ten years. To the best of his knowledge and belief she bears a very good moral character. There are counter-signatures on this certificate as under:

"Countersigned. M. M. Aggarwal. M. I. C. 30-6-62. Magistrate 1st Class Delhi

2. On 12th of July, 1962, the list of candidates, who were selected for admission to the LL.B. (Previous) Class was notified on the Faculty notice-board, but the petitioners name was not included. When the petitioner enquired of the first appellant as to why her name was not included, she was informed that her character certificate was net from a First Class Magistrate. He did not accept her contention that the countersigning of the certificate by a Magistrate was tantamount to a certificate from him. Higher authorities did not grant her redress and the petitioner received on 23rd of July, 1962, a communication from the Superintendent of the Faculty of Law Informing her that her letters had received careful consideration of the Vice-Chancellor and that he had decided that the rejection of her application was right. A further representation made by her father on her behalf was rejected. A writ petition was moved in this Court and the petitioners contention was that the character certificate produced was in order and complied with the relevant provisions. On the above allegations it was prayed that a writ in the nature of mandamus or other appropriate writ should be issued directing the three University authorities to accept the character certificate produced by the petitioner and to allow her admission to the LL.B. (Previous) Class 1962-63.

3. The matter came up before D. K. Mahajan J. who expressed the view that the University of Delhi had taken a correct stand th