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

2014 Supreme(P&H) 277

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Before
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice G.S. Sandhawalia
CWP No.25455 of 2013 (O & M)
Aditya Pratap Duggal & Ors.
v.
Panjab University & Ors.
{Decided on 31/03/2014}

For the Petitioners (In CWP No.25455 of 2013):Mr. Chetan Mittal, Sr. Advocate with Mr.Puneet Gupta, Advocate.
For the Petitioners (In CWP No.4297 of 2014):Mr. R.K. Sharma, Advocate.
For the Petitioners (In CWP No.4358 of 2014):Ms. Gargi Kumar, Advocate.
For the Petitioner (In CWP No.4360 of 2014):Mr. K.S. Khehar, Advocate.
For the Petitioner (In CWP No.4367 of 2014):Mr. Gurcharan Dass, Advocate.
For the Applicant (In CWP No.4367 of 2014):Mr. Vipin Mahajan, Advocate.
For the Caveators:Mr. D.S. Patwalia and Mr. B.S. Patwalia, Advocates.
For the Respondent-University:Mr. Amar Vivek, Advocate.

Headnote:(A) Education Law--Admission--LLB Course--60 additional seats granted by Bar Council of India to Punjab University--Permission was granted after starting of session--Filling up of seats--Held; Once the infrastructure and facilities are in place and the students are wanting to take admission against the additional 60 seats and the Academic Committee of the UILS has decided to fill up the seats in principal, it would be in the interest of one and all that the said seats do not go waste--The necessary exercise has already been conducted for the year 2013 and the merit list has been prepared--Once the Academic Committee of the UILS has taken a decision that the seats were liable to be filled, then to let the said seats go waste, would not be appropriate. (Para 15)

       (B) Education Law--Admission--LLB Course--60 additional seats granted by Bar Council of India to Punjab University--Permission was granted after starting of session--Filling up of seats--Mandamus can only be granted where there is statutory legal right which can be enforced and in the absence of any such right, the University is well within its jurisdiction to devise any special and extraordinary procedure so that the additional seats which have been sanctioned do not go waste. (Para 15)

       (C) Education--Admission--LLB Course--60 additional seats granted by Bar Council of India, after start session--Decision of university to accommodate only those who were doing Law Course is not warranted--No legal right vests/accrued for additional seats, in favour of students who are pursuing the Law Course somewhere--Additional seats were not part of prospectus--All candidates who appeared in entrance test are eligible as per merit list. (Para 18)

       

JUDGMENT

Mr. G.S. Sandhawalia, J.:- This order shall dispose of a bunch of 5 writ petitions bearing CWP Nos.25455 of 2013 (O & M), 4297, 4358, 4360 & 4367 (O &M) of 2014, involving common questions of facts and law. However, for dictating order, the facts have been taken from CWP No.25455 of 2013, titled Aditya Pratap Duggal & others Vs. Panjab University & others (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Lead case’) and CWP No.4360 of 2014 titled Samar Pratap Singh Ahluwalia Vs. The Panjab University & another.

2. The dispute in the present bunch of writ petitions pertain to the admission which is to be granted against the 60 additional seats which have been sanctioned by the Bar Council of India (hereinafter referred to as the ‘BCI’) vide letter dated 24.10.2013 (Annexure P1) in the B.Com. LL.B. (Hons.) 5 year Integrated Course, conducted by the respondent-University. The three petitioners, in the lead case, approached this Court by filing the said writ petition, praying that the respondents should made admissions to the said Course against the sanctioned enhanced intake capacity of 60 seats since the respondents had failed to make admissions for the academic year 2013-14, inspite of the fact that the competent authority (BCI) had granted the permission, after conducting the inspection. Counsel for the University had put in appearance on 16.12.2013. In its first short affidavit dated 17.01.2014, by the Registrar of the respondent- University, the plea taken was that admission process for the academic session 2013-14 had started in March, 2013. In anticipation of the approval from the BCI, 180 seats were advertised, 120 for B.A. LL.B. (Hons.) and 60 seats for the B.Com. LL.B. (Hons.) course. The final approval from the BCI was received on 31.10.2013, by e.mail dated 24.10.2013 and received on 18.11.2013 and therefore, it was not possible to admit 60 more students (one section) to the said Course, at that juncture. Intimation was sent to the BCI that the University Institute of Legal Studies (for short, the ‘UILS’) was continuing with only two sections of B.A. LL.B (Hons.) Course and of one section of B.Com. LL.B. (Hons.), for the academic session 2013-14. It was admitted that the request had been made by the petitioners for admission to the said course which was duly considered by the teaching staff and it duly resolved that it was not possible as the classes of the 1st Semester were already over. In para Nos.16 & 17 of the affidavit, it was submitted that the petitioners are already studying in B.A. LL.B./ B.Com. LL.B. (Hons.) elsewhere and may be admitted to 2nd Semester, purely on merit, if directed by this Court. Relevant paras read as under:

“16 & 17. That it is admitted that the Bar Council of India extended the intake of seats. Reiterating the contents of the Preliminary Submissions, it is however, submitted that the petitioners who are already studying B.A. LL.B./B.Com. LL.B. (Hons.) elsewhere may be admitted to Semester- II purely on merit if directed by this Hon’ble Court. The candidates mentioned in Para no.17 of the Writ Petition were admitted by the Panjab University on the direction of this Hon’ble Court.”

3. This Court, keeping in view the above affidavit, directed the University to take a decision as to how the the additional 60 seats were to be utilized. Relevant portion of the order dated 28.01.2014 read as under:

“Thus, it is apparent that the University is not taking any categorical decision as to how the additional 60 seats are to be utilized, as to whether fresh admission is to be done against the said seats or inter se migration is to be permitted. Admittedly, once the 60 seats have been sanctioned by the Bar Council of India and non-utilization of the said seats would also lead to a waste of seats for the present year, it is imperative that the University should take a decision as to how the said additional sanctioned intake is to be utilized. Let the said decision be taken within a week and the same be placed



























































































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 Back to top