ORDER
P. Venkatarama Reddi, J.
1.These appeals are preferred against the common judgment rendered by the learned single Judge dated 30-3-1999 in WP No.34063 of 1998 and batch of connected writ petitions reported in Nisha A. Shenai v. N.T.R. University, : 1999(3)ALD52 .
2. The 1st respondent in each of the writ appeals filed the writ petition questioning the action of the appellant-University in not permitting her/him to appear for the I year MBBS course examination that was held in April, 1999. The writ petitioners in particular assailed the legality of the communication dated 2-11-1998, sent by the Deputy Registrar (Examinations) of the University to the Principals of Medical Colleges in the State informing them as follows :
'I am by direction to inform you that the Examinations will be commenced last Monday of April, 1999forthe 1st MBBS students who were admitted in January, 1998 for the academic year 1997-98 Und the students who were admitted into 1st MBBS course later will have examinations in the month of October, 1999.
This is for your information and to enable the students to complete the course in the respective Medical Colleges.'
The writ petitioners i.e., the respondents in the writ appeals were allowed to appear for the examinations pursuant to the interim orders passed by this Court, but their results have not been announced. By our order dated 9-8-1999, we allowed the writ petitioners to attend the classes without prejudice to the respective contentions.
3. The writ petitioners were offered seats for admission into I year MBBS course in various Medical Colleges in the State for the academic year 1997-98 after a considerable delay. It appears that the delay had occurred on account of the pendency of the writ petitions and certain other administrative reasons. They were admitted in May, 1998. By that time, one batch of students were offered seats and admitted to classes in the last week of January, 1998, and thus, on account of fortuitous events, for the same academic year, two batches of students wereadmitted on different dates after a fairly long interval.
4. The course of study for the first year known as 'first phase' extends over a duration of 18 months according to the Regulations framed by the Medical Council of India,' which were in force upto 17-5-1997. Lateron, the pattern and duration of study was altered, and according to the new Regulations, the first phase of study would be of the duration of 12 months. Despite the fact that the Regulations came into force by the date of finalisation of selections and the commencement of admissions, it appears that the University found it impracticable to switch over to the new Regulations. According to the Counsel for the University, communications were sent to the Principals of the Medical Colleges that as far as the academic year 1997-98 was concerned, the study pattern would continue to be governed by the old Regulations. For the first batch of students admitted in January, 1998, the examinations were announced to be held in the last week of April/May, 1999, because by that time, the study of 18 months duration would almost be completed if the summer holidays also were taken into account. However, the second batch of students viz., the writ petitioners were denied the eligibility to write the examinations in April, 1999, and they were asked to take the examinations in the month of October, 1999 for the reason that they did not put in requisite period of study in view of their belated admission. We have already extracted the communication sent by the Deputy Registrar (Examinations) in this behalf. It appears that some of the students of the second batch got reconciled with the idea of writing the examinations in October, 1999, and they preferred not to take the examinations in April, 1999. However, the writ petitioners were keen on writing the examinations in April, 1999 itself, and therefore, they have approached this Court.
5. The learned single Judge of this Court, who rendered and elaborate judgment, allowed the writ petitions on the ground that the University had to fall in line with the new Regulations framed by the Medical Council of India, which were binding on the University and the students, and according to the new Regulations, the duration of study was only 12 months. Inasmuch as the writ petitioners almost completed 12 months of study by the date of commencement of the examination schedule in April, 1999, the learned Judge allowed the writ petitions with the direction to permit the petitioners to appear for the examinations commencing from 26-4-1999. The learned single Judge, however, rejected the other contentions advanced by the writ petitioners, in particular, the contention that they must be deemed to have complied with the old Regulations also in view of the extra classes alleged to have been conducted soon after the admissions and during summer vacation. The learned Judge held that the University and the students were bound to comply with the Regulations requiring them to undergo the first phase of the course for a period of 12 months.
6. Aggrieved by the said judgment, the University of Health Sciences has filed these writ appeals. At the stage of admission of the writ appeals, we passed the following order on 22-7-1999 :
'On hearing the Counsel for the University, the writ petitioners and the Medical Council of India, we feel that the Medical Council of India and the University Authorities should try to evolve a pragmatic and reasonable solution keeping in view the interests of the students and the academic standards in general. Such a dialogue in necessary to find a solution to this unseemly controversy affecting the careers of hundreds of students.'
Subsequently, the representatives of the University and the Medical Council of Indiahave met, and the Medical Council of India resolved to relax the rules as far as the academic year 1997-98 is concerned so as to permit the University and constituent Colleges to impart the training to the students of that year (two batches) as per the old Regulations. Thus, the decision taken by the Medical Council of India has imparted legality to the proposed action of the University to adhere to the old Regulations for the year 1997-98 batch of students. The substratum and ratio of the judgment of the learned Judge has disappeared by reason of the subsequent decision taken by the Medical Council of India at the instance of the University. The defect pointed out by the learned Judge no longer survives in view of this subsequent development.
7. Still, the question remains whether the writ petitioners, who have already appeared for the examinations should be compelled to write another examination in October, 1999 even if they are successful in April/May, 1999 examinations. It is true that normally, the students will be eligible to appear for the examinations only after the completion of course upto the prescribed duration, and in that sense, strictly speaking, the writ petitioners could not have been eligible to appear for the examinations held in April, 1999 because they have not completed 18 months of study. But, having regard to the peculiar fact situation obtaining in the present case, a doctrinnaire approach has to be avoided. What is required to be seen whether the spirit of the Regulations has been broadly fulfilled. It would be travesty of Justice if the students, who having once appeared for the examinations and passed therein, are required to appear for another examination to be held in October, 1999. In this context, it is worth noticing that there is no specific rule in the old Regulations prescribing the examination schedule. Apparently, by treating the petitioners to have passed in April, 1999 examinations on par with the first group ofstudents of 1997-98 batch, it cannot be said that any academic standards will be diluted as inasmuch as the petitioners will in any case be continuing the course upto the prescribed duration as per the old Regulations. The peculiar and unforeseen circumstances such as the delay in admission, the order of this Court permitting the students to appear for the examination and the subsequent decision taken by the Medical Council of India to relax the rules, should all be taken in conjunction while considering the question whether the writ petitioners' success in the examinations which they have already taken, should be recognized by the concerned authorities without driving them to write another examination. However as we are dealing with an academic matter which is to be primarily handled by academic bodies, we would not like to unduly fetter the sense of judgment of such bodies, more so when it is possible to take two views in the matter. Instead of giving positive direction, we therefore consider it just and proper to direct the University and the Medical Council of India to take appropriate decision in the light of the observations made above on the question of giving recognition to the success of the petitioners who have taken the examination in April, 1999 without insisting on taking another examination in October, 1999. It is heartening to note that the counsel for the University has informed the Court that the University will favourably consider the question of condonation of shortage of attendance by taking into account all relevant factors.
8. We, therefore, set aside the order of the learned single Judge, not because we have disagreed with the reasoning therein, but in view of the subsequent developments, which we have adverted to above. However, the direction given by the learned single Judge to permit the petitioners to appear for the examinations commencing from 26-4-1999 will stand subject to the decision that maybe taken by the Medical Council of India and the University as regards the recognition to be given to the examination taken by the writ petitioners in April, 1999. If the Medical Council of India on a consideration of the matter on the above lines expresses no objection for announcing the results of the writ petitioners who appeared for the examinations, the results should be announced without delay and the successful students need not be called upon to appear in October, 1999 examinations again. Having regard to the time factor involved, we do hope that the Medical Council of India will act with utmost expedition. The University will address a communication to the Medical Council of India in this regard immediately with its recommendation. The interim order given earlier permitting the petitioners to attend the classes, shall continue. The Writ Petitioners can pay the examination fee for October, 1999 examinations, by way of abundant caution.
9. The writ appeals are disposed of with the observations and directions as above. No costs.