Judgment:
ORDER
Shivaprakash, J
1. The petitioner was a student at the Senior School at Dubai established by the Government of India. The said School was controlled and supervised by the Central Board of Secondary Education, New Delhi. She appeared for the All India Senior School Certificate Examination 1990 and passed the said Examination as could be seen from Annexure-B, which is a copy of the 'marks obtained issued by the Central Board of Secondary Education. Subsequently, she applied to the 2nd respondent College for admission to the I year M.B.B.S. course for the academic year 1990-91. In the Petition she has pleaded that she has paid for admission 'substantial amount as contemplated for outside Karnataka students in the Government Orders issued from time to time under the Management quota'.
2. It appears the second respondent-College required Eligibility Certificate to be obtained by the petitioner from the first respondent-University for the purpose of admission to the I year M.B.B.S. Course. Accordingly, she made an application on 13.8.1990 furnishing all the particulars. The Registrar of the Bangalore University after satisfying himself about the particulars furnished by the petitioner, issued the Eligibility Certificate on 16.8.1990, copy of which is marked as Annexure-A. The said Eligibility Certificate reads as hereunder:
'BANGALORE UNIVERSITY
No. ACAI/R4/ELY/FS/ Jnana Bharathi,MBBS/90-91 Bangalore - 560 056.Date: 16.8.1990. ENDORSEMENT:
Sub: Provisional Eligibility Certificate for admission to I year MBBS/degree course during 90-91.
Ref: Application dated 13.8.1990 of Sri/Smt. Jolly Daniel, an Indian National.
This is to certify that Miss. Jolly Daniel an Indian National, bearing Passport No. B027280 and who has passed All India Senior School Certificate March 1990, vide Reg.No. 283486 conducted by Central Board of Secondary Education, New Delhi is provisionally considered eligible for admission to I year MBBS Degree course in Bangalore University during the academic year 90-91.
This is subject to the fulfilment of other admission requirements as per the University Regulations.
This Certificate has to be submitted by the candidate to the College at the time of his/her admission.
This is not a permission for late admission, if any. sd. Registrar,'
3. On the basis of the said Eligibility Certificate, the petitioner was admitted to the I year M.B.B.S., negree Course at the second respondent-College. She has complied with all other requirements including the production of Migration Certificate, Transfer Certificate etc.
4. According to the petitioner, 25th of May, 1991 was the last date to submit the application for entrance to the first M.B.B.S. examination to be conducted in June 1991 by the first respondent University. At that stage the Principal of the second respondent College gave her a copy of the letter dated 19.4.1991 received by the College from the 1st respondent-University. Copy of the said letter is marked as Annexure-C. In the said letter of the University addressed to the Principal of the second respondent-College, it is stated that in the course of random checking of admission registers, by the Inspection Team of the University, which visited the second respondent College on 23rd of November 1990, it was noticed that the petitioner had failed in 'Physics Theory' in All India Senior School Certificate Examination and, therefore, she did not have eligibility for admission to the I year M.B.B.S. Degree Course. In the letter it is asserted that the University had by its letter dated 30.11.1990 addressed to the Principal of the second respondent College had directed to 'discharge the candidate forthwith'. In the letter, it is also stated that reminders were also sent in this regard to the Principal to 'discharge' the student. Therefore, it is stated in the letter that the provisional Eligibility Certificate issued to her must be 'deemed to have been withdrawn and cancelled on the day on which the University informed the College of her ineligibility to the course for the year 1991.' It is asserted in the letter that the petitioner had 'misguided' the University by not producing the correct copy of the marks card. In the Xerox copy of marks card which she had produced the word 'failed' is not imprinted. The University has clearly stated in the said letter that in the circumstances the petitioner will not be permitted to appear for the ensuing examination and the College alone is responsible for any (SIC)ward happening in this connection.'
5. In this Petition, the petitioner has challenged the legality and validity of the order of the first respondent University withdrawing the Eligibility Certificate issued to her thereby making her ineligible to continue the medical course.
6. On 10.7.1991, the Court while issuing Rule, directing Emergent Notice to respondent No. 2 College, after hearing the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Counsel for the Bangalore University, taking into consideration that the petitioner had secured the Eligibility Certificate from the 1 st respondent University on the faith of which she had secured admission to the M.B.B.S. Course at the 2nd respondent-College out of the management quota seats by paying a lumpsum tuition fee and the donation, permitted the petitioner to take I year M.B.B.S. examination which commenced on 17th July, 1991.
7. In view of the aforesaid Interim Order and subsequent Interim Orders made by this Court, the petitioner has continued her studies in the M.B.B.S. Course. Presently, she is in the II year of the Course.
8. The main question that arises for consideration in this Petition is whether the petitioner has passed the qualifying examination to be eligible for admission to the I year M.B.B.S. Course.
9. During the pendency of this Petition, the petitioner made an application seeking leave of the Court to file an affidavit of her mother. The affidavit of the mother was accepted by this Court and affidavit of the mother of the petitioner was taken on record. In the said affidavit the mother of the petitioner has stated that she came to Bangalore with her husband and the petitioner, and stayed at Hotel Mayura near Majestic Square, Bangalore and they went to second respondent-College at Tumkur, where they were told to obtain Eligibility Certificate from the 1st respondent-University. She has stated that after returning to Bangalore, 'applied for the eligibility certificate and one gentleman by name Sri L.Maranna came forward to get us the eligibility certificate'. She has stated that since her daughter was treated as 'a foreigner', in all Rs. 2000/- was paid 'by way of a challan in the State Bank of Mysore, Nagarbhavi Branch, Bangalore'. It is further stated in the affidavit, that the original marks statement and also Xerox copy were given to the said Maranna since he wanted the 'Xerox copy to be attested'. On 16.8.1990 her husband collected the Eligibility Certificate from the said Maranna.
10. In the affidavit she has also stated that 2nd respondent College demanded Rs. 5,30,000/- and that they paid Rs. 4,30,000/-and for the balance an indemnity bond was executed by her husband. The copy of the indemnity bond is also attached to the affidavit of the mother of the petitioner. Subsequently, it appears the balance amount of Rs. 1,00,000/- has also been paid to the 2nd respondent-College. In the affidavit of the mother of the petitioner it is stated that for application form Rs. 120/-, for prospectus Rs. 100/-, for medical facilities Rs. 2,500/- and other charges, in all a sum of Rs. 2,440/- has also been paid under receipts including Eligibility Certificate fee. The said receipts are produced along with the affidavit.
11. Yet again on 22.7.1991 a sum of Rs. 1,305/- and Rs. 2,500/-have been paid in respect of which copies of receipts have been produced.
12. It is stated in the affidavit that a sum of Rs. 4,000/- was paid to the said L. Maranna at the time he 'handed over the Eligibility Certificate'. The mother of the petitioner has stated in the affidavit, 'I have no hand of playing any fraud on the University and I swear that the original and the Xerox copy of the statement of the marks were given'.
13. In the statement of objection filed by the University to the Main Petition, it is stated that the Endorsement dated 16.8.1990 i.e., the Eligibility Certificate, copy of which is marked as Annexure-A, does not relate to the petitioner as is obvious from the endorsement itself, which discloses that the Registration Number of the candidate who appeared for the All India Senior School Certificate Examination was 283486 though as a matter of fact the Registration Number of the petitioner, as could be seen from Annexure-B, was 283565. Therefore, it is asserted by the University that the petitioner 'has managed to obtain eligibility certificate' from the University by giving 'false information' and that the petitioner having so obtained the Eligibility Certificate on the basis of misrepresentation cannot now plead and contend that the Eligibility Certificate issued by the University cannot be withdrawn.
14. It is also stated in the objection statement that the University having come to know of the misrepresentation made by the petitioner passed the impugned order withdrawing the Eligibility Certificate and that the University has acted promptly after coming to know of the fraud played by the petitioner and informed the 2nd respondent College to discharge the petitioner from I year M.B.B.S. Course.
15. In the above circumstances, Sri N.K. Patil, learned Counsel for the University contended that the impugned order dated 19.4.1991 of the University is valid.
16. It is asserted on behalf of the University that the petitioner was not eligible to join I year M.B.B.S. Course in terms of the University Regulations, since she has failed in the subject 'Physics Theory' though she has passed the All India Senior School Certificate Examination of 1990. From Annexure-B, it is seen that in the subject Physics, bearing Code No. 042, 18 marks are awarded for Theory and 20 marks for Practical. The aggregate marks secured in the subject Physics are shows as 38 followed by two letters 'FT', which is the abbreviation for 'Fail in Theory'.
17. The learned Counsel, therefore, contended that the petitioner even though has passed the entire examination as declared by the Central Board of Secondary Education, has failed in 'physics theory' and therefore under the University Regulations she was not eligible for admission to the I year M.B.B.S. Course. In the additional statement of objections filed by the University certain particulars are given regarding the manner in which the provisional Eligibility Certificate was obtained by the petitioner. It is stated at paragraph 3 of the additional statement of objections that the application for obtaining provisional Eligibility Certificate is dated 12.8.1990 and the same was received by the University on 13.8.1990. Copy of the said application is marked as Annexure-R1. In the said application, under the caption 'Declaration by the Student', it is specifically stated that the admission of the petitioner is based on the authenticity of the school records, certificates, and admission of the petitioner is liable to be cancelled at any time if the records/certificates produced by the petitioner were to be found incorrect. Therefore, it is contended by the learned Counsel for the University, that the petitioner having misrepresented to the University and having produced an incorrect copy of the marks statement cannot now plead equity and contend that she has joined the Medical Course and paid a huge amount on the faith of the Eligibility Certificate issued by the University and therefore the University is estopped from withdrawing the Eligibility Certificate.
18. The relevant University Regulations bearing on the question at issue, is produced by the University under Memo dated 4.6.1992. The said Regulations are contained in the Notification dated 15.4.1985. The said Regulations came into effect from the academic year 1983-84. I reproduce below the relevant part of the said Regulations.
'1. Admissions Eligibility:-
Admissions to the MBBS Course:- The candidate shall have passed the two years PUC examination conducted by the PUC Board, Karnataka State, with Physics, Chemistry and Biology as optional subjects or any other examinations recognised as equivalent by the Bangalore University'.
19. It is not in dispute that the All India Senior School Certificate Examination, 1990 which the petitioner has passed, as could be seen from the marks statement Annexure-B, has been recognised by the University as equivalent to the PUC Examination conducted by the PUC Board, Karnataka State. From the marks statement it is seen that the petitioner had appeared for the said examination with the optional subjects Physics, Chemistry and Biology and that she has been declared to have passed the said All India Senior School Certificate Examination, 1990. It is also provided in the University Regulations that the candidate should have secured not less than 50% of the total marks in Science subjects taken together at the qualifying examination or at a higher examination. In the instant case, the petitioner has secured more than 50% of the total marks in Science subjects taken together at the qualifying examination, namely, the All India Senior School Certificate Examination.
20. Sri N.K. Patil, however, relied on certain Guidelines issued by the Registrar of the University under cover of his letter dated 6.11.1990. Under the caption 'General' in the said Guidelines, it is stated as hereunder:
'In some cases, it is noticed that at the All India Senior School Certificate Examination conducted by the Central Board of Secondary Education, New Delhi, the candidates who have offered Physics, Chemistry, Biology and Mathematics subjects at the said examination and failed in any one of the above subjects are declared as 'Pass' by the Board. Such candidates are not eligible for admission to Medical Course in Bangalore University unless he/she has passed the subject/s concerned at the qualifying examination.'
21. The learned Counsel for the University submitted that the petitioner has not secured the minimum in the 'Physics theory' and therefore she has been declared by the Board at the qualifying examination as having failed in theory, despite the fact that the total marks secured by the petitioner in the said subject Physics being 38.
22. The Regulations framed by the Academic Council of the University which has obtained the assent of the Chancellor cannot be modified by other University functionaries by issuing Guidelines or clarifications. Since the petitioner has passed the qualifying examination, namely, the All India Senior School Certificate Examination, 1990 having secured more than 50% marks, in terms of the Regulations she was eligible for admission to the first year M.B.B.S. Course for the academic year 1990-91. There is nothing in the Regulations, which I have reproduced above, which enjoins that the candidate should have secured, minimum marks, separately, in Theory and Practicals of the subject Physics for being eligible for admission to First Year M.B.B.S. Course.
23. For the foregoing reasons, the impugned order of the University withdrawing the Eligibility Certificate on the ground that the petitioner was not eligible for admission to I year M.B.B.S., Course cannot be sustained. Hence, the impugned order of the University is quashed. Writ Petition allowed.
24. Before I conclude, I wish to draw the attention of those who are at the helm of the affairs of the University, to the allegation made against one L. Maranna, an official of the University, by the mother of the petitioner in the matter of securing Eligibility Certificate. The said Maranna is the third respondent in this Petition. In his affidavit dated 13.1.1992 he has completely denied the allegation and accuses the petitioner herself of having played fraud in obtaining the Eligibility Certificate. He denies having ever met the petitioner or her parents.
25. In the affidavit dated 29.1.1992 filed by one Manikya Rao Ghorpade, Senior Assistant, Academic Section I, Bangalore University, inter alia, it is stated that 'a person on behalf of Miss Jolly Daniel appeared and asked me to hand over the provisional eligibility certificate. I handed it over to him after taking his due acknowledgment as the office copy. That acknowledgment is signed by the person who received the provisional eligibility certificate and that person is L. Maranna'.
26. This requires further investigation. If what is alleged by the petitioner and her parents against L. Maranna, an official of the University is true, he cannot escape the punishment he deserves.
27. I do hope that the Head of the University will take a serious view of the matter and take necessary steps in accordance with law to punish the guilty.