Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details


High Court of Rajasthan

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


RAJU MANOHAR BARWA v V C, U O R, JAIPUR AND ORS - CW Case No. 706 of 2007 [2007] RD-RJ 698 (5 February 2007)

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.706/07 05.02.2007

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mohammad Rafiq

Mrs. Archana Mantri for petitioner.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

The grievance of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that question no.6a and 6b showing part of

Section-C of the paper of the Financial

Management No.307 which carried 12 & 3 marks respectively were out of the syllabus. Two questions carrying 15 marks were not set from the prescribed syllabus. When this fact was brought to the knowledge of the Director of the

Institute by making a representation, she assured the petitioner that his complaint shall be forwarded to the University

Grievance Redressal Committee who is empowered to deal with such matters. The petitioner however submits that nothing has been done and even the representation has not been forwarded to the University

Grievance Redressal Committee.

Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, I find that the issues raised by the petitioner are required to be dealt by experts academicians on the subject. It is further to be noted that if the petitioner is raising a grievance, it is the duty of the respondent university and their functionaries to look into it and if found genuine, redress such grievance.

But such issues cannot certainly be entertained by this Court directly in the remedy of writ petition.

I therefore while dismissing the writ petition deem it appropriate to direct the petitioner to make a representation to the University

Grievance Redressal Committee which shall examine the grievance of the petitioner and may adjudicate thereupon within four weeks from the date of receipt of such representation. It goes without saying that in case the University Grievance

Redressal Committee decides the matter in favour of the petitioner, the petitioner would be free to approach to the institution for restoration of his admission.

(Mohammad Rafiq),J.



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


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 |

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