Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

NIRVAIR SINGH versus PUNJABI UNIVERSITY, PATIALA & ORS

High Court of Punjab and Haryana, Chandigarh

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Nirvair Singh v. Punjabi University, Patiala & Ors - CWP-7376-2005 [2006] RD-P&H 1381 (3 March 2006)

C.M. No. 3307 of 2006 and

C.W.P. No. 7376 of 2005 (O&M) [1]

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

C.M. No. 3307 of 2006 and

C.W.P. No. 7376 of 2005 (O&M)

Date of Decision: March 10, 2006

Nirvair Singh

.....Petitioner

Vs.

Punjabi University, Patiala and others

.....Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINEY MITTAL.
Present:- Mr. D.S. Patwalia, Advocate

for the petitioner.

Mr. Deepak Sibal, Advocate

for the respondents.

-.-

VINEY MITTAL, J. (ORAL)

On a joint request made by the learned counsel for the parties, the main writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal.

Mr. D.S. Patwalia, the learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner has argued that the challenge in the main petition is to the order dated April 20, 2005, (annexure P-4), whereby the petitioner- Nirvair Singh was ordered to be rusticated from the Department. Mr. Patwalia has further placed reliance upon Punjabi University Calendar Vol. 2, Regulation 5 (i) wherein it is provided that rustication would mean a loss of one academic year. According to the learned C.M. No. 3307 of 2006 and

C.W.P. No. 7376 of 2005 (O&M) [2]

counsel, since petitioner Nirvair Singh has already lost 4th Semester and 5th

Semester, therefore, the petitioner is entitled to appear in the internal examination for 4th

Semester which are being held within the month of March 2006. On the other hand, Mr. Deepak Sibal, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent University has contended that as per Regulation 5 (i) a rustication has to operate for a full one academic year, and therefore, the order annexure P-4 having been passed on April 20, 2005, the petitioner cannot have any claim to appear in any examinations to be held in the month of March, 2006 i.e. within one year.

However, Mr. Sibal very fairly states that as per Regulation 5 (i), the petitioner would have right to appear in the 4th

Semester examinations after April 20, 2006.

This offer of Mr. Sibal fully satisfies the petitioner, Nirvair Singh, who is present in Court.

In this view of the matter, the present writ petition is disposed of as having been rendered infructuous. The petitioner shall be permitted to appear in any 4th

Semester examination to be held after April 20, 2006.

C.M. as well as the main writ petition stand disposed of.

Copy of the order be given dasti on payment of usual charges.

March 10, 2006 (VINEY MITTAL)

sanjay JUDGE


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.