Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

DWIG VIJAI NATH MISHRA versus REGISTRAR BUNDELKHAND UNIVERSITY JHANSI & OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Dwig Vijai Nath Mishra v. Registrar Bundelkhand University Jhansi & Others - WRIT - C No. 19865 of 2000 [2006] RD-AH 11493 (14 July 2006)

 

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

HON. SHISHIR KUMAR, J.

I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri R.P.Tiwari for the University.

The relief sought in the writ petition is that a mandamus be issued directing the respondents to declare the result of LL.B. II year back paper. The session relates to the year 1997-98. The petitioner submits that he was not informed regarding the result of the back paper. Subsequently, when the petitioner was informed, it came to the knowledge of the petitioner that he has obtained 33 marks out of 100. The petitioner submits that there is provision for appearing second time in back paper though Mr. R.P. Tiwari has stated before this Court that there is a provision of only one chance for appearing in the examination, therefore, this Court while exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 of the constitution of India cannot adjudicate this controversy.

It is however, open to the petitioner to approach the Registrar, Bundelkhand University, Jhansi for his grievances and if the University authorities are of opinion that according to rules the petitioner is entitled to appear in the second back paper, he maybe permitted. If not, the petitioner cannot be permitted to appear second time in the back paper of LL.B. II year. It is provided that the petitioner will submit a detailed representation to the Registrar, Bundelkhand University, Jhansi, respondent no.1 and respondent no.1 will consider the same according to law.

With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of.

14.7.2006

V.Sri/-

W.P. 19865 of 2000


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.