Posted On by &filed under High Court, Punjab-Haryana High Court.


Punjab-Haryana High Court
Pooja Khanna vs Panjab University on 9 October, 2000
Author: N Sodhi
Bench: N Sodhi, R Kathuria


JUDGMENT

N.K. Sodhi, J.

1. As authorised by Chandigarh Administration and Punjab Government, the Panjab University, Chandigarh (for short the University) conducted an entrance test on 9.7.2000 for mission to B.Ed, course in the College of Education affiliated to Panjab University, Chandigarh, Panjabi University, Patiala and Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar. For admission to the colleges of Education in Union Territory, Chandigarh 85% seats were reserved for Union Territory pool students who had passed their qualifying examination form Colleges recognised by the Chandigarh Administration and situated in the Union Territory of Chandigarh as regular students. The remaining 15% set as were to be filled from amongst the students who had passed their qualifying examination from institutions other than those located in the Union Territory of Chandigarh. Admission to B.Ed. course in the affiliated colleges of the three Universities for the session 2000-2001 has been made on the basis of relative merit of the candidates in the entrance test subject to the availability of seats in a particular subject, combinations and such reservations as prescribed by the Union Territory Administration/Punjab Government. Admission to the B.Ed. course is subject based and at the time of admission each candidate is required to opt for two teaching subjects. A candidate can opt only those teaching subjects which he/she has studied at the graduation level. List of such combinations alongwith the seats available in different colleges is given in the table attached to the prospectus. One of the categories of subject combinations with which we are concerned in this case is Arts Graduates who arc required to opt for any one teaching subject from Teaching of Social Studies/Teaching of History/Teaching of Geography/Teaching of Civics/Teaching of Economics. They are also required to opt for teaching of any one of the languages i.e. English, Hindi, Punjabi and Sanskrit. There is a note attached to this subject combination which reads as under:

“Note : Teaching of Social Studies shall be opted by the graduates who have taken up any two of the following subjects at B.A. level i.e.

(i) History, (ii) Geography, (iii) Political Science

(iv) Sociology, (v) Economics, (vi) Public Administration

(vii) Philosophy, (viii) Psychology, (ix) Education”

2. Petitioner appeared in the entrance test and qualified in the same. She secured 168 marks out of 250 and her rank in the merit list was 109. There were in all 3780 seats to be filled in the various Colleges affiliated to the three Universities. Her first choice for admission was to the Government College of Education, Patiala and second choice was Dev Sarnaj College of Education for Women, Sector 36, Chandigarh. She also opted for Government College of Education, Sector 20, Chandigarh, as her third choice. She is an Arts Graduate and opted Social Studies as one of the teaching subjects. She gave her option of (i) English Literature and (ii) Psychology (one subject from teachingof Social Studies). Petitioner alongwith others who were declared successful in the entrance test were required

to appear for the first counselling on 17.8.2000 at Dev Samaj College of Education for Women, Sector 36, Chandigarh. She appeared on the appointed date and time and was told that she was not eligible for the B.Ed. course in view of the subject combination offered by her. Feeling aggrieved by the action of the University and respondent No. 3, she has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution for a mandamus directing the respondents to admit her to the course as, according to her, she fulfils the requirements prescribed in the prospectus.

3. In response to the notice of motion issued by this Court, the University lias filed its reply through its Registrar. Respondent No. 3 has also filed its reply through its Principal. It is pleaded on behalf of the respondents that the petitioner is not entitled to admission in the B.Ed. course because she was not having subject combinations as prescribed in the prospectus.

4. We have heard counsel for the parties and are of the view that there is no merit in the writ petition. It is common case of the parties that the petitioner being an Arts Graduate opted for the subject combination of Social Studies and English. As per the note reproduced above which appears on page 5 of the prospectus, an Arts graduate can opt for the teaching of Social Studies provided he/she has taken up any of the two subjects referred to in the note at B.A. level. Admittedly, the petitioner had taken Psychology as one of the subjects in B.A. but had not studied at that level any other subject referred to in the note. She was, therefore, not entitled to opt for the teaching of Social Studies. The University was, thus, right in holding that the petitioner was ineligible for admission to the course.

In the result, the writ petition fails and the same stands dismissed leaving the parties to bear their own costs.

5.Petition dismissed.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

8 queries in 0.141 seconds.