Back
1987 Supreme(All) 342
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
K. C. AGRAWAL, R. P. SINGH
PARVEZ AHMAD - Appellant
Versus
ALIGARH MUSLIM UNIVERSITY - Respondents
C. M. W. 7387 Of 1987
Decided On : 08/13/1987
A.M.Zaidi, Dilip Gupta
Courts should be hesitant to interfere with the decisions of academic bodies, as they are best equipped to make such decisions.
Headnote:
UNIVERSITY ORDINANCE - ATTENDANCE REQUIREMENT - CONDONATION OF SHORTAGE - DISCRIMINATION - JUDICIAL INTERFERENCE WITH ACADEMIC DECISIONS.
Fact of the Case:
15 students of Aligarh Muslim University challenged their detention due to shortage of attendance, preventing them from appearing in the final year B. Sc. Engineering examination. The University's Academic Ordinances required 75% attendance for eligibility to appear in the examination, and the Condonation Committee did not recommend condonation of shortage for petitioners with attendance below 65%.
Finding of the Court:
The Court found that the petitioners failed to establish discrimination in the condonation of shortage, as the University had followed a uniform standard and condoned shortage in cases that met the criteria. The Court also emphasized the importance of attending classes, particularly in Engineering, and the need for discipline in academic institutions.
Issues: 1. Whether the petitioners were discriminated against in the matter of condonation of shortage in attendance. 2. Whether the Court should interfere with the academic decision of the University.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. Discrimination under Article 14 of the Constitution requires conscious discrimination, and a mistake in one case does not justify continuing the mistake in others. 2. The University's requirement of 75% attendance for eligibility to appear in the examination was reasonable and uniformly applied. 3. The Condonation Committee had the authority to condone shortage in attendance, and its decisions were not discriminatory. 4. Courts should hesitate to interfere with the decisions of academic bodies, as they are best equipped to make such decisions.
Final Decision: The Court dismissed the petition, holding that the petitioners failed to establish discrimination and that the University's decision was reasonable and justified.
( 1 ) THIS petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution was initially filed on 16-4-1987 by 15 petitioners against the Aligarh Muslim University Controller of Examination, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh and Dean Faculty of Engineering for Mandamus directing the respondents aforesaid to permit them to appear in the Examination of B. Sc. Engineering (Final year) for the academic year 1986-87 which was going to commence on 18-4-1987 along with an application for interim order.
( 2 ) THE petitioners 1 to 13 were the students of B. Sc. Engineering (final year) of Mechanical Engineering and petitioners 14 and 15 were the students of B. Sc. Engineering (Chemical) final year. They had completed their IV year. They were however, detained and were not permitted in the V year due to shortage of attendance.
( 3 ) CHAPTER XVII of the Academic Ordinances deals with "examinations". Clause I of the Ordinance lays down as to who are regular students. It reads :" (A) regular students, i. e. candidates who have undergone a regular course of study in the University or an institution maintained by the University for a period specified for that course of study. "clause 2, which is relevant for our purposes, is as under :-"2. A candidate shall be deemed to have undergone a regular course of study for the period specified for the course to be eligible to appear at the examination if he has fulfilled the requirements as given in the chart below. "
( 4 ) THE Schedule given below clause 2 provides for the percentage of attendance of students of different subjects in order to be eligible to appear at the examination. The relevant portion of the schedule dealing with B. Sc. Engineering is mentioned below :-FACULTY attendance sessions Requirement ______________ lectures practical tutorials Seminars engineering (B. Sc. B. E. and M. Sc. ). 75%combined
( 5 ) CLAUSE 11 (a) of the Academic Regulations (Chapter XXIV) confers power of condonation of attendance on the Condonation Committee. It provides : "the Condonation Committee in the Faculties of Arts, Social Sciences, Science, Law, Commerce, Theology, Engineering and Technology and Medicine should not recommend the condonation of shortage in attendance in the case of a student whose actual physical attendance is less than 65% (or less than 70% in the case of Post graduate Diplomas in the Faculty of Medicine ). "
( 6 ) AFTER the Writ Petition was filed, petitioners 11, 13 and 15 were sent up by the respondents on the ground that they had been wrongly detained. So far as other petitioners are concerned, their attendance was below 65% up to which shortage could be condoned. The attendance of the petitioners was as under :petitioner No. 1 62. 5% petitioner No. 2 62. 5% petitioner No. 3 53. 5% petitioner No. 4 56. 4% petitioner No. 5 59. 8% petitioner No. 7 52. 4% petitioner No. 8 59. 2% petitioner No. 9 52. 2% petitioner No. 10 59. 4% petitioner No. 12 61. 8% petitioner No. 14 49. 1%
( 7 ) THE Condonation Committee in accordance with R. 11 of the aforesaid Regulation contained in Chapter XXIV of the Academic Regulations did not recommend the cases of the aforesaid petitioners and they were detained being students falling in List-C.
( 8 ) IN order to ensure that the Condonation Committee followed R. 11 of Chapter XXIV of the Academic Regulations, the Dean of various Faculties are required to send to the Controller of Examination the attendance of regular students in three lists which are :-1. List a 2. List b 3. List c
( 9 ) LIST c mentions the names of such students who have put in below 65% of attendance and declared detained.
( 10 ) THE petitioners counsels main argument was that since the University Grants Commission had issued direction to the Aligarh Muslim University for holding classes for 180 days and as the total number of teaching was 157 days only, the petitioners could not be held guilty of not having completed 75% required for being eligible to appear in the examination. The submissio
