Khushaboo Khudia v. Panjab University & ORS

VINOD KUMAR 2015.05.04 16:38 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh CWP No.17141 of 2014 (O&M) [ 1 ] *****

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CWP No.17141 of 2014 (O&M) Date of decision:29.04.2015 Khushaboo Khudia

...Petitioner

Versus

Panjab University, Chandigarh and others

...Respondents

CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rakesh Kumar Jain

Present:

Mr. Arjun Lakhanpal, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. Arun K. Bakshi, Advocate, for respondents no.1 and 2.

Mr. Rohit Dheer, Advocate, for respondent no.3.

***** Rakesh Kumar Jain, J.

The petitioner has prayed for a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the order dated 16.07.2014 by which her admission in Bachelor of Business Administration Second Year (BBA-II) has been cancelled.

In brief, the petitioner got admission in the BBA course as a regular student in the respondent no.3-college. She failed in three subjects in BBA-I and her result was declared as "FAIL". She applied for revaluation of one paper in which she failed and was short of few marks from acquiring the minimum pass marks. She filled up the application form

VINOD KUMAR 2015.05.04 16:38 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh CWP No.17141 of 2014 (O&M) [ 2 ] ***** for registration in BBA-II, wrongly mentioning her result status of BBA-I as "compartment" instead of the actual status of being failed. As per the detailed marks sheet issued by the Panjab University, the petitione r had failed in 3 subjects, namely, (i) Quantitative Techniques (QUT), (ii) Basic Accounting (BAC) and (iii) Computers Fundamental & Information technology (COM). She failed even after the revaluation result was declared and the BBA-I result of the petitioner was declared as P.R.S. (previous result stands) but despite that she had filled her status as "compartment" in the admission form of the BBA-II.

It also requires pertinent notice that in her letter Annexure P-5, she has mentioned that she had failed in two subjects, whereas she had failed in 3 subjects and there was no compartment, therefore, she was not entitled to be admitted in BBA-II and because of the fraud played by the petitioner in her admission form where she has mentioned "compartment", the action taken by respondent no.3 for cancellation of her admission is legally justified and cannot be termed to be arbitrary and unreasonable for the purpose of interference in this writ petition. In view thereof, the present writ petition is hereby dismissed being denuded of any merit.

April 29, 2015 (Rakesh Kumar Jain) vinod* Judge