W.P.No.12016/2010
26.10.2010.
Shri Siddharth Gupta, counsel for the petitioner.
Shri Mahendra Pateriya,Counsel for the University.
Shri Mohan Sausarkar, Counsel for DCI.
Shri A.P.Shroti, Counsel for respondents 3 and 4.
The controversy involved in this case in nutshell is as
under:
(i)The students, who failed in more than one subject, were
entitled to appear in the supplementary examination.
(ii) such students were permitted to prosecute the studies
in higher classes.
The contention of the petitioner is that till Feb.2010 such
students were permitted to appear in supplementary examination
and also to prosecute studies. While this contention is denied by
the respondents. It is also submitted by Shri Pateriya that until
and unless such students attend the classes for 240 days, they
are not entitled to appear in the higher examination.
Considering aforesaid, we direct thus:
(I) The University and the College both to clarify the position
in respect of the factual aspect;
(ii) The University to produce material in support of its
contention and;
(iii) The College is also directed to apprise this Court whether
the students of the petitioner-association have attended the
classes for the present academic session for more than 240 days.
All the aforesaid exercise shall be done on or before 8 th
November, 2010.
Be listed for hearing on 10th November, 2010.
(Krishn Kumar Lahoti) (Smt Sushma Shrivastava).
Judge Judge