Petitioner Vs. Respondent

Petitioner vs Respondent

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Madurai Decided Jun 24, 2016

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1190244

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1190244
Court: Chennai Madurai High Court
Judge: M. Venugopal
Decided On: Jun 24, 2016
Case Number: W.M.P.(MD).No. 8329 of 2016 in W.P.(MD).No. 10749 of 2016
Subject: Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue: Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Petitioner

Respondent

Excerpt

.....bridge course ii year) is equivalent to a pass in +2/h.sc. 4. per contra, the learned counsel for the first respondent submits that the petitioner is not eligible for the b.ed., course as per guidelines issued in g.o.no.(1d) no.168 dated 07.07.2015. 5. by way of reply, the learned counsel for the petitioner strenuously projects an argument that the petitioner had already lost an opportunity to write two exams on 18.06.20156 and 19.06.2016 respectively and remaining 8 exams are to be written by the petitioner. the examination is to take place on 25.06.2016, 26.06.2016, 02.07.2016, 03.07.2016, 09.07.2016, 10.07.2016, 16.07.2016 and 22.07.2016 respectively. therefore, the petitioner may be granted the permission to write the remaining exams beginning from 25.06.2016. 6. taking note of the fact that the petitioner should not lose an opportunity to write the remaining exams beginning from 25.06.2016, at this stage, this court, simply permits the petitioner to write the exams in question beginning from 25.06.2016. it is made quite clear that the writing of the exams by the petitioner beginning from 25.06.2016 will not clothe him any right. 7. in short, subject to the result of the writ petition, the petitioner is permitted to write the exam beginning from 25.06.2016 till 22.07.2016. 8. the first respondent is directed not to publish the results of the examination relating to the petitioner until further orders of this court.

Full Judgment

1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.

2. In the instant case, it comes to be known that the first respondent had issued a proceedings in Ref.No.TNTEU/Elig/2016/188 undated addressed to the Principal of the third respondent stating that the petitioner was admitted to B.Ed., programme without following the admission guidelines (G.O.No.(1D) No.168 dated 07.07.2015). Further, in the said proceedings, in the remarks column, it is stated as under:

Remarks

12th std. is not completed.

Hence, she is NOT ELIGIBLE for admission

to B.Ed., Programme.

3. At this stage, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Directorate of Distance and Continuing Education of the second respondent University in ENROL.No.A10C25079006, dated 13.06.2016, had inter alia stated that 'A pass in this course (Degree Bridge Course II year) is equivalent to a pass in +2/H.Sc.

4. Per contra, the learned counsel for the first respondent submits that the petitioner is not eligible for the B.Ed., course as per guidelines issued in G.O.No.(1D) No.168 dated 07.07.2015.

5. By way of reply, the learned counsel for the petitioner strenuously projects an argument that the petitioner had already lost an opportunity to write two exams on 18.06.20156 and 19.06.2016 respectively and remaining 8 exams are to be written by the petitioner. The examination is to take place on 25.06.2016, 26.06.2016, 02.07.2016, 03.07.2016, 09.07.2016, 10.07.2016, 16.07.2016 and 22.07.2016 respectively. Therefore, the petitioner may be granted the permission to write the remaining exams beginning from 25.06.2016.

6. Taking note of the fact that the petitioner should not lose an opportunity to write the remaining exams beginning from 25.06.2016, at this stage, this Court, simply permits the petitioner to write the exams in question beginning from 25.06.2016. It is made quite clear that the writing of the exams by the petitioner beginning from 25.06.2016 will not clothe him any right.

7. In short, subject to the result of the writ petition, the petitioner is permitted to write the exam beginning from 25.06.2016 till 22.07.2016.

8. The first respondent is directed not to publish the results of the examination relating to the petitioner until further orders of this Court.

Same Court & Year Chennai Madurai · 2016 Same Parties Petitioner vs Respondent Same Subject Education Same Judge M. Venugopal