MAHARSHI DAYANAND UNIVERSITY Vs. ANTO JOSEPH
LAWS(SC)-1998-7-35
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Decided on July 29,1998

MAHARSHI DAYANAND UNIVERSITY Appellant
VERSUS
ANTO JOSEPH Respondents


Cited Judgements :-

R M SOLANKI VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2008-4-169] [REFERRED TO]
KRISHNA DUTT RATHOD VS. REGISTRAR JNTU [LAWS(APH)-2003-4-9] [REFERRED TO]
V PRASHANTH KUMAR VS. JAWAHARLAL NEHRU TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY [LAWS(APH)-2003-4-26] [REFERRED TO]
V PRASHANTH KUMAR VS. JAWAHARLAL NEHRU TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY [LAWS(APH)-2004-4-32] [REFERRED TO]
G DINESH KUMAR VS. VICE CHANCELLOR JAWAHARLAL NEHRU TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY [LAWS(APH)-2004-11-138] [REFERRED TO]
UNIVERSITY OF CALCUTTA VS. MANAS SARKAR [LAWS(CAL)-2000-4-1] [REFERRED TO]
MANAS SARKAR VS. UNIVERSITY OF CALCUTTA [LAWS(CAL)-2000-3-20] [REFERRED]
ABHEY SINGH JAIN VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-1999-8-59] [REFERRED]
ANIL CHAUDHURY VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-1999-8-4] [REFERRED]
SUSHMA CHOUDHARY VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2001-1-56] [REFERRED TO]
MRINAL JOSHI VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN [LAWS(RAJ)-2002-4-34] [REFERRED TO]
ZEESHAN KHAN AND ORS. VS. JAI NARAYAN VYAS UNIVERSITY AND ORS. [LAWS(RAJ)-2014-2-207] [REFERRED TO]
JYOTIS CHERIAN JOHN & OTHERS VS. BABA FARID UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES, FARIDKOT & OTHERS [LAWS(P&H)-2003-2-197] [REFERRED]


JUDGEMENT

- (1.)The order under challenge was passed upon the writ petition of the first respondent in the following circumstances. On 12/10/1993, the first respondent joined the MD course in Anaesthesia of the appellant-University. The examination for that course was to be conducted on 27/9/1996. The first respondent having fallen short of the minimum training period requirement, applied to the University for an exemption. The application having been turned down, the first respondent moved a writ petition for a writ directing the University to allow him to appear at theexamination. On 21/8/1996, the High court passed an interim order on the writ petition directing the University "to admit the petitioner to the examination provisionally subject to the final decision of this court". When a the writ petition reached hearing, this is the order that the High court passed:
"Heard counsel appearing on either side.

The petitioner joined postgraduate degree course, namely, MD Anaesthesia on 11/10/1993. Final examination started on 27/9/1996. By virtue of an interim order of this court, he took that examination. The short question that arises for consideration is whether the result of the examination is to be directed to be published or not.

On the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, since he has undergone the course for nearly three years except for a few days and also secured more than 80 per cent of the attendance in the course, we do not find any justification for not declaring the result of the examination taken by him.

Under the above circumstances, not to be treated as a precedent, we direct the University to declare the result of the examination taken by the petitioner. In case he has come out successful, the University is directed to confer on him the Master's degree.

Writ petition is disposed of in the above terms. "

(2.)At an interim stage, this court stayed the operation of the aforequoted order. Consequently, the result of the first respondent has not been declared.
(3.)Learned counsel for the University drew our attention to the requirements of the Medical council of India with regard to the period of Q training. "they read thus:


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.