Back
MANJU RANI CHAUHAN
Kenisha Singh Jeet – Appellant
Versus
State Of U P – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Mr. Arvind Kumar Srivastava-III, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Asheem Mukherjee, learned StandingCounsel for the State-respondents, Mr. Rohit Pandey, learned counsel for the respondent-University and Mr. V.P. Rai, learned counsel for the respondent-institution.
2. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner for a writ of mandamus commanding the respondent nos. 5 and 6 to rectify their mistake by verifying the examination form of the petitioner, upload the admit card of the petitioner on website and permit him to appear in the final (revised)Examination Schedule (P.G.) M.A. (Final Year) Main Exam-2021, as per the updated schedule dated 7th July, 2021. He further prays for a direction upon the respondent nos. 5 and 6 to conduct fresh examination of the petitioner in respect of final (revised) Examination Schedule (P.G.) M.A. (Final Year) Main Exam-2021, as per the updated schedule dated 7th July, 2021.
3. Counter and rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged between the parties and they agree that this petition may be finally decided without calling for any further affidavit.
4. In the present petition, it is the case of the petitioner that the petiti
Point of law: Petitioner submits her examination form along with examination fee and other details as required, on the portal of the respondent-University.
The university must ensure proper communication regarding examination schedules to avoid prejudice against students.
A university cannot deny a student the right to continue studies or withhold examination results based on procedural failures, especially after allowing the student to attend classes and take exams.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of Regulation 17(a)-2(iii) and the court's reliance on precedents to allow the issuance of the consolidated marksheet of M.Sc. (Com....
Exceptional circumstances can warrant deviation from standard procedures to uphold the rights of the petitioner.
Educational institutions cannot withhold results based on procedural errors after allowing students to take examinations, emphasizing the need for adherence to statutory obligations.
The court emphasized the need for administrative flexibility in educational admissions, stating a minor error should not lead to denial of opportunities. Timely rectification of the error weighed hea....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the petitioner's eligibility to appear in the 6th Semester Examination was determined based on the attendance requirement under Ordinance VII.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
