Soma Dwivedi vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Headnote:(A) Education Law - Academic Ordinances - Eligibility for ATKT and Promotion - Natural Justice - A candidate is eligible for ATKT examination only if they have failed in not more than two subjects as prescribed in the relevant ordinances (Ordinance No. 6, Clause 36(i)) - No student shall be admitted to a subsequent higher semester unless they have passed the qualifying semester examination, although provisional admission may be granted to those eligible for ATKT, subject to reversion if unsuccessful (Ordinance No. 7, Clause 4(2)) - The principles of natural justice and fair play necessitate that authorities grant an opportunity of hearing to the aggrieved party before issuing adverse observations or deciding a complaint (Paras 9, 10, 11).

Facts of the case:
The petitioner challenged a letter issued by the college principal stating she was absent in the sessional and project viva examinations, which contributed to the non-declaration of her sixth-semester B.Com results. The petitioner claimed she had passed the second semester via ATKT and was permitted to study up to the sixth semester. The respondents contended that she had failed three subjects in the second semester, making her ineligible for ATKT and promotion to higher semesters under the applicable ordinances, and that she had suppressed this information to obtain admission.

Findings of Court:
The court observed that the petitioner had failed in three subjects of the second semester, meaning the semester was declared "back" and she did not meet the eligibility criteria for ATKT or promotion. However, the court found that the authorities made adverse observations in the impugned letter regarding the petitioner's absence in sessional and project viva examinations without providing her any opportunity of hearing, thereby violating the principles of natural justice.

Issues: Whether the petitioner had cleared the second semester examination to enable further studies and whether the adverse observations made in the impugned letter were sustainable without granting the petitioner an opportunity to be heard.

Ratio Decidendi: While the petitioner's academic eligibility was governed by university ordinances, the administrative process of handling her complaint was flawed. Any adverse finding or observation made by authorities that affects a person's rights must be preceded by an opportunity of hearing to satisfy the requirements of natural justice and fair play.

Result: Impugned observation in the letter set aside; matter remanded to the respondents for reconsideration and a fresh order after providing the petitioner an opportunity of hearing within 90 days.

Legal Category Hierarchy

1. Student challenged denial of forwarding examination form due to alleged failure in earlier semester examination. (Para 1 , 2 )

2. Petitioner claimed cleared earlier semester; respondents argued failure in three subjects and suppression. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 )

3. Observation in letter set aside for violation of natural justice; matter remanded for fresh hearing. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 )

4. Does natural justice require a hearing before making adverse observations in a complaint proceeding?

Yes, the court held that no opportunity of hearing was granted, rendering the adverse observation unsustainable. (Para 10 , 11 )

5. Under University Ordinance, is a student eligible for ATKT examination if failed in more than two subjects?

No, ATKT eligibility is limited to failure in not more than two subjects; failure in three subjects results in semester being declared back. (Para 9 , 10 )

ORDER, J.

VISHAL MISHRA, J.

This petition has been filed assailing the part of the letter dated 25.10.2019 passed by the respondent No.4-Principal, Saraswati Science College, Rewa, wherein it is mentioned that the petitioner was absent in College Sessional and Project Viva Examination.

2. It is a case of the petitioner that she took admission in Govt. Vivekanand College Maihar in B. Com. She passed 1st Semester examination. Thereafter, she appeared in 2nd Semester examination but failed. Therefore, she appeared in ATKT of 2nd Semester and was declared passed. She took print out of mark-sheet from the website of Awadhesh Pratap Singh University, Rewa. Thereafter, she got married and got herself transferred to Saraswati Science College, Rewa where she was given admission in 3rd Semester in the month of July, 2017. She appeared in 3rd Semester examination and passed. She was allowed to prosecute her studies in 4th Semester and passed. She deposited college fees for 5th Semester and passed the examination. Thereafter, she was allowed to prosecute her studies in 6th Semester and she deposited the fees but her examination form was not forwarded by the Saraswati Science College, Rewa to the University on the ground that she had not cleared the 2nd Semester. She submitted application dated 05.04.2019 to the Registrar, Awadhesh Pratap Singh University, Rewa mentioning that she has deposited requisite fees for examination. The Registrar of the University put an endorsement and made some queries. Since nothing was done, the petitioner submitted another application on 09.05.2019 requesting the authorities to forward her examination form. When no heed has been paid, petitioner's husband submitted application dated 09.05.2019 to the Additional Director, Higher Education Rewa Division Rewa who issued a show cause notice to the Principal, Saraswati Science College, Rewa to submit explanation as to why he is not taking action in the matter of forwarding the examination form of the petitioner and the Principal was required to appear before him. The reply to the same was submitted by the Principal, Saraswati Science College, Rewa. The Principal further submitted a detailed information to the Additional Regional Director, Higher Education Rewa Division Rewa in response to CM Helpline Complaint which is subject matter of challenge in this writ petition.

3. It is submitted that in para 7 of the letter dated 25.10.2019, incorrect information was given by the Principal, Saraswati Science College, Rewa regarding petitioner's absence in the examination. In support of her case, the petitioner has filed affidavits of Abhinaya Tiwari and Neeraj Vishwakarma dated 13.12.2019. From the print out taken by the petitioner of B.Com VI Semester Examination from website of APS University, Rewa, she was shown absent. It is her case that she did not commit any wrong nor has played any fraud with the respondents-authorities. Time to time she applied and after obtaining permission to appear in the next semester, she was permitted to prosecute her studies upto 6th Semester. Now at this belated stage, an objection is taken with respect to the petitioner not passing 2nd Semester examination which is not correct. Therefore, this petition.

4. On notice being issued, respective replies have been filed by the respondents. They have denied the petition's averments. The respondent- University has relied on Clauses 36(i)(iii) & 7 of the Ordinance No.6 and Clause 4(2) of the Ordinance No.7. The petitioner has not disclosed information regarding second semester as required in terms of Clause 36(i) of the Ordinance No.6. The respondent No.4 has not forwarded the sessional marks of the petitioner in the sixth semester before the University; therefore, the result of the petitioner for sixth semester in per Clause 7(i) and (ii) of the Ordinance No. 6 was not declared. As per documents (Annexure P/9 and P/12) filed by the petitioner, she clearly admitted that she has not cleared the second

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2026 Supreme(MP) 684

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR
VISHAL MISHRA, J.
Soma Dwivedi – Petitioner
Versus
The State Of Madhya Pradesh And Others – Respondents
Writ Petition No. 4272 Of 2020
Decided On : 13-01-2026

Administrative authorities must adhere to the principles of natural justice and provide an opportunity of hearing before making adverse findings against a student, regardless of whether the student meets the academic eligibility criteria set by university ordinances.

Legal Category Hierarchy

Table of Contents

4. Does natural justice require a hearing before making adverse observations in a complaint proceeding?

5. Under University Ordinance, is a student eligible for ATKT examination if failed in more than two subjects?

Judicial Analysis

2026 Supreme(MP) 684

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPURVISHAL MISHRA, J.Soma Dwivedi – Petitioner VersusThe State Of Madhya Pradesh And Others – Respondents Writ Petition No. 4272 Of 2020Decided On : 13-01-2026

Administrative authorities must adhere to the principles of natural justice and provide an opportunity of hearing before making adverse findings against a student, regardless of whether the student meets the academic eligibility criteria set by university ordinances.

Legal Category Hierarchy

Table of Contents

4. Does natural justice require a hearing before making adverse observations in a complaint proceeding?

5. Under University Ordinance, is a student eligible for ATKT examination if failed in more than two subjects?

Judicial Analysis

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR
VISHAL MISHRA, J.
Soma Dwivedi – Petitioner
Versus
The State Of Madhya Pradesh And Others – Respondents
Writ Petition No. 4272 Of 2020
Decided On : 13-01-2026