RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT

                Raj Kumar Pipara

                Vs.

                University of Rajasthan

                Civil Writ Petn. No. 2760 of 2000
                           (V.S. Kokje, J.)

                03.04.2001

                ORDER

V.S. Kokje, J.

1. With the consent of the parties, the matter was finally heard.

2. The short question which falls for determination in this case is as to whether the
petitioners were eligible to take the M.B.A. Part II (Day Time) examination, 2000 or
not. This Court already permitted them by an interim order to take the examination.
Though, by the time the interim order was made, three papers had already been over
and therefore, the petitioners could not appear at them. Rest of the examination has
been taken by them under the interim orders passed by this Court. This Court while
permitting the petitioners to take the M.B.A. Part II (Day Time) examination, 2000,
had directed that the result of the examination shall not be declared without
permission of this Court. On the last date, the University was directed to submit the
result in a sealed cover. The result has been submitted by the counsel for the
University in a sealed cover today.

3. The petitioners were declared unsuccessful in M.B.A. Part I examination. Dis-
satisfied by the valuation of their papers in certain subjects, the petitioners applied for
revaluation under Ordinance 157 -A of the University. As required by the Ordinance,
the petitioners had applied within the time limit prescribed for submitting the
applications for revaluation. This was done in the month of September, 1999. As the
result of the revaluation was awaited, the petitioner applied for being provisionally
admitted to the M.B.A. Part II Year course and their respective institutions permitted
them to attend M.B.A. Part II classes provisionally. M.B.A. Part II examination was to
commence on 10th June, 2000. The result of revaluation was declared on 2nd June,
2000 and the petitioners became entitled to appear at M.B.A. Part II examination.
They have cleared their M.B.A. Part I examination after revaluation of their answer
books. The University did not allow them to appear at the M.B.A. Part II examination,
2000 and therefore, they filed this petition and this Court permitted them to take the
examination by issuing an interim order.

4. The only objection of the University now is that before the result of revaluation was
declared, the petitioners were not entitled to take admission even provisionally in the
M.B.A. Part II classes. According to the learned counsel for the University, the
Institutes illegally admitted them provisionally without seeking any permission from
the University and therefore, the petitioners cannot be taken to have been regularly
admitted to M.B.A. Part II course and cannot be taken to have attended the course for
the requisite number of days. Thus, the University is of the opinion that the petitioners
are not eligible to take the examination as they have not attended the M.B.A. Part II
course as regular students for the requisite number of days.

5. Having heard the learned counsel and having perused the record, I find that the
entire problem has been created by the University failing in its duty to declare the
result of revaluation within a reasonable time from the last date of receiving
applications for revaluation. When the applications were received in the month of
September, 1999, the result of the revaluation should have been declared within a
month or at the most a couple of months. To take nine months for declaring the result
of revaluation is not understandable and is hardly explicable on any reasonable
ground. The candidates apply for revaluation in an effort to save one valuable year of
their career, they do not apply for revaluation for academic purposes. The object is to
be able to appear at the next examination with their original batch. To meet this object,
it is necessary that the result of revaluation is declared within a reasonable time.
Ordinance 157-A (14) of the University gives an idea as to what would be reasonable
time. It is declared in the said provision that a candidate who is declared eligible for
supplementary examination as a result of revaluation shall be permitted to appear at
the usual supplementary examination. Thus, primarily it is expected that the result of
the revaluation is declared before the next supplementary examination commences.
That is the normal time limit which should be adhered to by the University. If for
some reason, this is not possible then the other alternative given is that if the
supplementary examination is over, by the time the result of revaluation is declared
then the candidate is eligible to appear at the next main examination along with the
higher examination. It is further provided by the said provision that a candidate who
becomes eligible for admission to a next higher class consequent upon improvement
of his result on revaluation in the middle of a session shall be considered eligible for
admission to that class within 21 days from the date of issue of communication of the
revaluation result not later than 31st December of the same session. It is also provided
that in such cases attendance shall be counted from the date of admission. It is,
therefore, very clear that it is expected of the University to declare the result of
revaluation at least before 31st December of the same session.

6. If the University had followed the provisions of Ordinance 157-A, the difficulty
which is faced by the petitioners would not have arisen. Instead of declaring the result
of revaluation by 31st December, 1999, the University declared it as late as on 2nd
June, 2000. If in the meanwhile, the petitioners had already attended provisionally
M.B.A. Part II classes with the permission of the Institutions, affiliated to the
University, they cannot be blamed. They were clearly eligible to take the examination
of M.B.A. Part II, 2000.

7. The University cannot take advantage of its own wrong by contending that the
admission granted to the petitioners by the affiliated colleges was illegal or irregular. It
is a matter between the University and the affiliated college and the petitioners cannot
be blamed for that.

8. In the circumstances of the case, therefore, it is clear that the petitioners were
eligible for taking the M.B.A. Part II (Day Time)examination, 2000. The result of the
examination is, therefore, directed to be formally declared. The petitioners shall be
eligible to take the papers, in which they remained absent as also in which they might
have failed, afresh at the next examination as per eligibility in accordance with law.
The result in the sealed cover is returned to the learned counsel for the University. The
University shall declare the result within a week from today.

Ordered accordingly.