Back
2009 Supreme(All) 3252
[2009(8) ADJ 648 (LB)]
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
(Lucknow Bench)
BEFORE : SHRI NARAYAN SHUKLA, J.
SAMIKSHA VERMA ...Petitioner
Versus
UNIVERSITY OF LUCKNOW AND OTHERS ...Respondents
(Writ Petition Nos. 5601 (M/S) of 2005 and 3196 (M/S) of 2008,
decided on 6th October, 2009)
Counsel :
Jayant Singh Tomar and Jan Laxmi Tiwari for the Petitioner; K. Chandra and I.B. Singh for the Respondents.
Headnote:Education—Admission—LL.B. Three Years Degree Course—Petitioner permitted to appear in examination of LL.B. each and every semester without giving admission in course even without declaration of result of preceding semesters—Under strength of the interim order of Court, dated 16.7.2008 petitioner also succeeded to deposit entire admission and examination fees for all semesters and to get declare result of all semesters of LL.B. examination at the same time—Vice-Chancellor has rightly rejected petitioner’s representation seeking admission in LL.B. course as her merit was much below to the last candidate admitted in the course and after giving admission to the candidate who was at the rank of 135, the total seats also filled up—Thus, no error in order impugned—Since, petitioner succeeded to appear in examination and to get declaration of results under strength of various interim orders of Court from time to time, which was not permissible, hence, petitioner was not entitled to receive any benefit on basis of said result—Petitioner's result of LL.B. examination would be non est and she would not be entitled to get benefit of degree of LL.B. Examination, if awarded to her. [Paras 20 and 29]
Hon’ble Shri Narayan Shukla, J.—Since in both the writ petitions common question of facts and law are involved, the same are being disposed of by following common judgment.
2. Heard Ms. Samiksha Verma, petitioner (in person) and Mr. Upendra Nath Mishra, learned counsel for the Lucknow University, Lucknow.
3. Through writ petition No. 5601 (M/S) of 2005 the petitioner has sought the following relief :
“(a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 20.10.2005 passed by the respondent No. 2 as contained in Annexure 2 to this writ petition.
(b) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite parties to give her admission for the LLB. three years academic course after being holding proper procedure either by counseling or any other procedure, which is legal and just.
(c) Issue any other order or direction, which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.
(d) Allow the writ petition with costs."
Through writ petition No. 3196 (M/S) of 2008 the petitioner has sought the following relief :
“(a) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite parties to admit the petitioner in the LLM. academic course-2008.
(b) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the opposite parties to admit the petitioner LLM. entrance form without LLB. Mark-sheet.
(c) Issue any other order or direction, which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.
(d) Allow the writ petition.”
4. Firstly through writ petition No. 5601 (M/S) of 2005 the petitioner has challenged the order dated 20th October, 2005 passed by the Vice Chancellor, Lucknow University, Lucknow, whereby the petitioner was denied from giving admission in LLB. course by rejecting her representation on the ground that the petitioner’s position in the merit list was quite below to the candidate last admitted as she was placed at the rank of 502; whereas the last candidate admitted belongs to general category was at the rank of 135.
5. The order dated 20th October, 2005 passed by the Vice Chancellor, Lucknow University. Lucknow, reveals that the petitioner had filed writ petition bearing No. 5051(M/S) of 2005 with the submission that she had applied three years LL.B course but instead of existing several vacancies the petitioner’s candidature had not been considered by the opposite parties. This Court issued direction to the Vice Chancellor, Lucknow University, Lucknow to consider and decide the petitioner’s representation, pursuant to which the Vice Chancellor, Lucknow University, Lucknow passed the order impugned.
6. After institution of writ petition No. 5601 (M/S) of 2005 this Court by means of the order dated 28.10.2005 passed the following interim order on the memo of writ petition :
“Sri Krishna Chandra, learned counsel has accepted notice on behalf of opposite parties. He is directed to file a detailed counter affidavit within 2 weeks. A week further time is allowed to file rejoinder affidavit. List immediately thereafter.
In the meantime, one vacancy shall be kept in reserve which shall be subject to further orders passed by this Court.”
7. On 23.12.2005 this Court passed the following interim order on the order-sheet :
“List in the second of January, 2006.
In the meantime, petitioner shall be permitted to appear in the examination in question provisionally but result shall not be declared.”
8. It appears that pursuant to the aforesaid interim order passed by this Court the petitioner was permitted to appear in the examination in question provisionally but since this Court restrained the declaration of the result, the same was not declared.
9. Then the petitioner moved C.M. Application No. 6845 of 2006 with the title (Third Application for disposal of writ petition and for issuing direction to the opposite party to declare the result of the LL.B. 3 years Ist semester exam
