Ankita Meena vs University Of Delhi on 22 January, 2021


Try out our Premium Member services: Virtual Legal Assistant, Query Alert Service and an ad-free experience. Free for one month and pay only if you like it.

Supreme Court of India

Ankita Meena vs University Of Delhi on 22 January, 2021

Author: Hon’Ble The Justice

Bench: Hon’Ble The Justice, A.S. Bopanna, V. Ramasubramanian

                                                    1


                                                                       Non­Reportable


                                   IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
                                    CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                         SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 26484 OF 2018
                                                   and
                         INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION NO. 102466 OF 2020
                                                    in
                         SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 26484 OF 2018


          ANKITA MEENA                                             …   PETITIONER(S)
                                                 VERSUS
          UNIVERSITY OF DELHI                                     … RESPONDENT(S)
                                                ORDER

V. Ramasubramanian, J.

1. Challenging an order of the learned single judge, confirmed by

the division bench in an intra­court appeal, refusing to interfere

with the decision of the University denying permission to her to

appear in the 4th Semester LLB Examination, a student has come

up with the above SLP.

Signature Not Verified

Digitally signed by

2.
Sanjay Kumar
Date: 2021.01.22
17:07:25 IST
We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the
Reason:

learned counsel for the University.

2

3. The petitioner joined the 3­year LLB Course at Law Centre­II,

Faculty of Law, University of Delhi in August, 2016. By the time

she joined the course she was already married for about 5 months.

4. The petitioner completed the first 3 semesters without any

hindrance. However, she fell short of the required attendance

during the 4th Semester, due to two difficulties. One was that she

gave birth to a baby on 22.02.2018, disabling her to attend the

classes till the end of March, 2018. The second difficulty was that

the Delhi University Teachers’ Association went on a strike from

16.03.2018 and hence the University could not conduct the

minimum number of classes as prescribed by Rule 10 of the Bar

Council of India Rules.

5. Therefore, the petitioner was detained by a notice dated

09.05.2018 and not permitted to write the 4 th Semester

Examinations scheduled to commence from 12.05.2018.

6. The petitioner therefore filed a Writ Petition (Civil) No.5194 of

2018 on the file of the High Court of Delhi seeking a direction to

the University to permit her to appear for the 4 th Semester
3

Examinations. But the writ petition was dismissed by an order

dated 15.05.2018.

7. An intra­court appeal was filed by the petitioner in LPA No.294

of 2018, but the same was dismissed by the Division Bench by an

order dated 07.09.2018. It is against the said order that the

student has come up with the above SLP.

8. On 05.10.2018 this Court ordered the issue of notice in the

SLP. While doing so this Court also permitted the petitioner to

attend classes at her own risk on completion of the required

formalities. Subsequently, several orders were passed by this

Court, which are presented in a tabular column by the petitioner in

her application I.A.No.102466 of 2020. It reads as follows:­

S. No. Date Order(s)

1. 19.11.2018 We have heard learned counsel appearing for
the parties and perused the application for
directions.

“Learned counsel appearing for the
respondent­University, states that if the
applicant is qualified to appear in the
examination, she will be allowed according to
law.”

In view of the above, the instant application
for directions is disposed of.

2. 15.02.2019 “Having heard learned counsel appearing for
4

the parties and upon perusal of the instant
application for directions, we direct the
respondent­University to permit the applicant
to attend the classes of VI Semester as per
this Court’s order dated 05.10.2018, on
completion of the required formalities.”

The interlocutory application for directions is
allowed accordingly.

3. 05.07.2019 The application is allowed in terms of prayer
clause (aa), which reads as under:

“Direct the Respondent to permit the applicant
to appear in the V Semester Supplementary
Examination to be held on 06.07.2019, as per
the directions of this Hon’ble Court dated
05.10.2018, 19.11.2018 and 15.02.2019.”

The result will be subject to the outcome of
this special leave petition.

4. 27.08.2019 List after two weeks.

In the meanwhile, counter affidavit may be
filed.

5. 28.07.2020 “Having heard learned senior counsel
appearing for the parties and upon perusal of
the instant application for directions, we
direct that the results of the present
applicant/petitioner viz., Ankita Meena, for
the IV and VI Semester results shall be
declared by the respondent(s).”

The instant applicant applications for
directions stand disposed of accordingly.

List the main matter along with connected
matter(s) for final hearing in due course

9. Pursuant to the aforesaid orders, the petitioner appeared for

the examinations of the 4th, 5th and 6th Semesters. There are no
5

further examinations. The University has also declared the results

of the 4th and 6th Semester examinations, but has not declared the

results of the 5th Semester Supplementary Examination. Therefore,

the petitioner has come up with I.A.No.102466 of 2020 seeking a

direction to the respondent to declare the results of the petitioner

for the 5th Semester Supplementary Examination and to grant the

provisional degree, consolidated mark sheet and character

certificate.

10. When the above interlocutory application came up for hearing,

we took up the main special leave petition also, in view of what is

stated hereunder.

11. From the sequence of events narrated above, it is quite clear:

(i) that the petitioner has completed the course in entirety; (ii) that

the results of all the semester examinations except the 5 th Semester

Supplementary Examination has already been declared; and (iii)

that the lis in the SLP, though relates to the 4 th Semester, does not

actually survive for an active adjudication on account of the

subsequent developments. Once the petitioner has completed the

course and also written the 5th and 6th Semester Examinations and
6

even got the results of all the semester examinations except the 5 th

Semester Supplementary Examinations published, the

adjudication of the dispute in the SLP will only be a matter of

academic interest.

12. Therefore, the I.A. and the SLP are disposed of directing the

University to declare the 5th Semester supplementary Examination

results of the petitioner and issue the provisional degree along with

necessary certificates, if she had passed the examinations, subject

to the petitioner clearing the other formalities. This order is passed

in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case.

………………………………CJI
(S.A. Bobde)

…………………………………J.

(A.S. Bopanna)

…………………………………J.

(V. Ramasubramanian)
New Delhi
January 22, 2021



Source link