Divij Khanna v. Panjab University And Another

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Civil Writ Petition No. 21554 of 2024 (O&M) Date of Decision: 03.09.2024 Divij Khanna .....Petitioner versus Panjab University and another .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SHEEL NAGU, CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL, JUDGE Present :

Mr. Anand Singh Rohilla, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Akshay Kumar Goel, Advocate, for the respondent=University.

****
    


 1.

The petitioner who is aspirant for admission in LL.B. (three years course) conducted by the Panjab University, Chandigarh has filed this petition. 2.

The case of the petitioner is that he could not appear in examinations for two subjects i.e. English (compulsory) and public administration (last semester) of graduation examination due to some sports event and now he is seeking that of one post in three years LL.B. course conducted by Panjab University, Chandigarh be kept vacant under sports category awaiting declaration of result of above two subjects of B.A. final year to be conducted in near future.

3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon a copy of e-mail dated 30.07.2024 of the Deputy Registrar (Colleges), Panjab University, Chandigarh, by which persons who had obtained supplementary in final year graduation examination were allowed to be admitted in first year in post graduation i.e. M.A./M.Com./M.Sc./M.Com. (BE)/MBA(CIT)/M.Com. (Entrepreneurship & Family Business) /MFDM/M.Com. (innovation) etc. and Post Graduate Diploma Courses which reads as under:-
RAVINDER KUMAR 2024.09.05 11:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document









 [2]
 




 

     

 



     !"  # $! %

" 
 !    

   &

& &  & 

'&

()&  

'   
 * +
" 


&+,&&  

(  
   # - ,
   

  ./.01.2   

    
   
 
  
  "     
 !    !         &

 &   &   & 

' &

()&   '   
 * +
" 


 &+,&&   (  
        "


"  3
"
 !$        


   #  
   " !      
   "
 " 3
"           



  

 
 
          4   4.

It is obvious from the reading of the said e-mail that the same does not apply to admissions for three years LL.B. course.
5.

Learned counsel for the respondent-University, on instructions, submits that the petitioner do not satisfy the minimum eligibility criteria for admission to three years LL.B. course as prescribed by the Bar Council of India.

6.

In view of the above, the most important document relied upon by learned counsel for the petitioner does not relate to the course in question and therefore, there is no substance in the petition which is accordingly dismissed. (SHEEL NAGU) CHIEF JUSTICE (ANIL KSHETARPAL) JUDGE 03.09.2024 ravinder Whether speaking/reasoned √Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No√ RAVINDER KUMAR 2024.09.05 11:17 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document