The Allahabad High Court has directed the Prabha Devi Bhagwati Prasad Vidhi Mahavidhayalay affiliated to Gorakhpur University to pay compensation of Rs 5 lakh to the petitioner.
The Division Bench of Justice Manoj Kumar Gupta and Justice Vikas Budhwar passed this order while hearing an appeal filed by Ajay Kumar Pandey.
The intra-court appeal is against the order of the Single Judge dated 28.08.2024, whereby the petition preferred by the appellant-writ petitioner challenging the orders dated 01.11.2021 and 04.01.2021 of the Registrar, Deen Dayal Upadhyay Gorakhpur University, Gorakhpur, second respondent and Executive Examination Controller, Deen Dayal Upadhyay Gorakhpur University, Gorakhpur, third respondent was dismissed.
The case of the appellant before the writ court was that there happens to be an institution by the name of Prabha Devi Bhagwati Prasad Vidhi Mahavidhayalay, Anantpur, Harpur-Budhat, Gorakhpur, fourth respondent affiliated to Deen Dayal Upadhyay Gorakhpur University, Gorakhpur.
A notification came to be published by the University on 15.10.2019 for the grant of admission in LLB three years course for the academic session 2019-20. As per the notification, the last date for submission of the application form was 23.10.2019.
According to the appellant-writ petitioner in order to secure admission, the relevant documents were to be submitted before the Law College and therefore, the same were to be transmitted to the University. As per the appellant-writ petitioner the required documents were submitted before the last date i.e 23.10.2019 before the Law College but the same stood transmitted to the University on 10.06.2020.
Thereafter, an online examination form came to be issued. The appellant writ petitioner was accorded admission and he was allowed to appear in the first semester examination of the LLB course for the year 2019-20 and the results were declared on 26.05.2020. Since the marks for LLB first semester examination 2020 were not awarded as per the expectation of the appellant-writ petitioner so he preferred Writ in which on 08.12.2020.
It is also the case of the appellant-writ petitioner that the answer sheets of the appellant writ petitioner were re-evaluated and with respect to paper No 146 the marks stood enhanced from 36 to 42.
As per the appellant-writ petitioner though he was entitled to appear in the second semester viva voce examination which was scheduled on 24.01.2021 but he was not allowed to appear. The same led to filing of representation on 24.01.2021 and 25.01.2021 and thereafter, Writ which was entertained by the Court while seeking response from the respondents herein.
Thereafter, a counter affidavit came to be filed by the University coming up with a stand that consequent to the holding of the inquiry by a committee constituted by the University by order dated 20.12.2020 a report came to be submitted on 01.01.2021 holding that the admissions accorded to 55 students including the appellant-writ petitioner was illegal since the writ petitioner along with the 54 others were not eligible to be accorded admission as according to the brochure for P.G Entrance examination-2019 (academic session 2019-20) a student in order to be eligible should possess the graduation degree relatable to the academic session 2016 or thereafter and since the appellant-writ petitioner did its graduation in the year 2008, thus, he was not eligible to be accorded admission.
Thereafter, on the basis of the report of the committee dated 01.01.2021 the University took a decision to cancel the admission of the appellant-writ petitioner along with 54 candidates on 04.01.2021.
Assailing the order of the Single Judge, the appeal has been preferred.
The Court noted that it is not in issue that the University issued a notification on 15.10.2019 for submitting online examination form for admission in three years LLB programme for the academic session 2019-20, last date whereof was 23.10.2019. It is also not in dispute that the Brochure came to be published by the University setting out the modalities according to which the admissions are to be accorded of the LLB three years course for the academic session 2019-20. Parties are in agreement that clause 5 of the brochure in question stipulated that with regard to eligibility for being accorded admission in the LLB three years course for the academic year 2019-20 a student should have a graduation degree of the year 2016 or onwards. Apparently, the appellant-writ petitioner possesses graduation degree of the year 2008 though he has projected in his application form that the same was of the year 2015.
The Court observed that,
The bone of contention between the parties is as to who is at fault. On a pointed query being raised to the counsel for the Law College, Grijesh Tiwari has made a statement that as per the procedure set out therein the entire documents including the testimonials are to be submitted by a student to the Law College and thereafter the records are transmitted to the University. It has also come on record that as many as 55 students’ admissions stood cancelled. Interestingly, in the case in hand the appellant-writ petitioner was accorded admission in the first semester of the LLB three year course, however, he was not allowed to appear in the LLB second year examination. Records further reveal that the University had constituted a committee with regard to the illegalities committed in the admission of the students in the Law College relatable to LLB three years course of the academic session 2019-20 whereafter, it revealed that not only the appellant-writ petitioner but also other students were illegally accorded admissions. The Single Judge on a challenge raised to the decision of the University in the writ petition proceeded to pass a detailed order on 29.04.2024.
Though according to the counsel for the appellant-writ petitioner, since, he had been accorded admission in first semester of LLB three years course, so he cannot be denied permission to appear in second semester is concerned, the same is neither here nor there particularly when appellant-writ petitioner was not eligible as he had a graduation degree of the year 2008 and not of the year 2016 or onwards. Since the conditions stipulated in clause 5 of the brochure for admission for the academic session 2019-20 for LLB three years course is not under challenge, thus, we are not required to delve into the aspect relating to the legality of the same. Thus, the relief sought for permitting the appellant-writ petitioner to appear in the second semester of LLB three years course is declined.
The Court further observed that,
Now the next question which arises for our consideration is whether the appellant-writ petitioner has been adequately compensated or not and is entitled to enhance compensation. Interestingly, the finding of the Single Judge that the Law College was responsible in granting admission to the appellant-writ petitioner on the face of the fact that all the documents/ testimonials was submitted by the appellant-writ petitioner and he is entitled to monetary compensation of Rs 30,000/- has not been questioned by the Law College. We have been informed that the Law College has not preferred an appeal against the said findings and the directions and the same has attained finality.
Moreover, the report of the committee dated 01.01.2021 and the decision of the University dated 04.01.2021 clearly holds that the Law College had committed illegality in granting admission to the students.
Since it has not been disputed before us and rather admitted by Grijesh Tiwari, counsel for the Law College that the documents submitted by the respective students to the Law College are routed through the Law College to the University with its recommendation, thus, looking to the overall circumstances, it becomes highly inconceivable and improbable that the Law College was vigilant and not at fault.
It is rather amazing that the Law College has acted not only in a careless and reckless manner but also exhibited conduct other than bona fide just in order to enrol and admit students in order to charge fees playing with their future. The Chapter did not close at that juncture, however, admission was accorded to the appellant-writ petitioner for the academic session 2019-20 and he cleared the first semester on 26.05.2020. A decision cancelling admission of the appellant-writ petitioner has been taken in the month of January, 2021. As per the affidavit of the appellant-writ petitioner he is now 35 years of age.
Grijesh Tiwari, counsel for the Law College could not dispute the fact that it was on account of the fault of the Law College the appellant-writ petitioner was accorded admission, however, on the question of enhancement of compensation, he only requested that the amount of Rs 5,00,000/- to be awarded as compensation to the appellant-writ petitioner is excessive and the Law College is not in a position to make the said payment. He also apprehends that, in case, the compensation of Rs 5,00,000/- is awarded to the appellant-writ petitioner then the remaining 54 students would approach the Court.
“We have bestowed our consideration on the said aspect and we find that once it is admitted to the Law College that the appellant-writ petitioner had not practised fraud and he submitted all the relevant documents and was accorded admission due to the fault of the Law College then in order to compensate the appellant-writ petitioner for jeopardizing his academic career the amount of Rs 5,00,000/- to be awarded as monetary compensation is reasonable and not excessive.
Accordingly, the order of the Single Judge insofar as it seeks to uphold the decision of the University dated 04.01.2021 negating the claim of the appellant-writ petitioner to be permitted to pursue second semester of the LLB three years programme for the academic session 2019-20 needs no interference”, the Court also observed while disposing the appeal.
“However, we modify the order of the Single Judge dated 28.08.2024, while enhancing the monetary compensation from Rs 30,000/- to Rs 5,00,000/- which shall be paid by the Law College to the appellant-writ petitioner within a period of six weeks.
In the eventuality, the Law College does not make the said payment within the stipulated period then the same shall be recovered as arrears of land revenue and paid to the appellant-writ petitioner”, the Court ordered.
 | ReplyReply allForward |