Arhan Sett v. Jamia Milia Islamia & Anr

SANJIV KHANNA, J. MAY 02, 2011 NA

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: 2nd May, 2011. + LPA NO. 405/2011 ARHAN SETT ..... Appellant Through Ms. Meenakshi Arora, Adv. with Mr. Mohit D. Ram, Adv. versus JAMIA MILIA ISLAMIA & ANR ..... Respondent Through Mr. M. Atyab Siddiqui, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest ? DIPAK MISRA, CJ In this intra-Court appeal, the assail is to the order dated 28th April, 2011 passed in W.P.(C) No.2765/2011 whereby the learned single Judge has declined to grant the benefit of relaxation of 15% of attendance to the appellant on the ground that there has been non-compliance of Ordinance 15. The Ordinance 15 reads as follows:- "Ordinance 15(XV) The University Examinations 2. Attendance (for Regular Students) 2.1 A Candidate shall be deemed to have under- gone a regular course of study in the University, if he/she attended at least 75% in the aggregate of lectures, tutorials and practicals in order to be eligible to appear at the Examinatin. Provided that the Majlis-i- Talimi (Academic Council) may, in special circumstances, condone any shortage in such attendance except otherwise provided by the Academic Council. 2.2 a relaxation of the maximum extent of 15% of the total attendance shall be accorded to student on account of sickness, participation in University functions and the prescribed Educational Tours/Field Trips/Field work, provided that the attendance record, duly counter signed by the Teacher incharge, is sent to the Head of the Department concerned/Principal, University Polytechnic within two weeks of the function/activity etc. Provided further inn case of sickness/medical disability an application for the condonation shall be supported by a medical certificate issued by a registered Medical Practitioner/Public Hospital and duly authenticated by the Ansari Health Centre of JMI. Such applications must be submitted either during the period of treatment/hospitalization or within two weeks following recovery." 2. The medical certificate that was produced before the university has been brought on record at page 56, which reads as follows:- "To whom it may concern Certified that I had examined Mr. Arhan Sett of 55A Dilkhusha Street, Kol-17 during his visit to Kolkata in the 1st week of October, 2010 and treated him for Migraine attack." 3. It is not in dispute that the said certificate was produced on 17th March, 2011 and it was not certified as required under the proviso. Be it noted, the appellant-student sought relaxation from attendance for the period August, 2010 to November, 2010. 4. Mr. M.A. Siddiqui, learned counsel for the university would contend that the certificate apart from not being in accordance with the proviso to Ordinance 15, also does not indicate the period of rest as advised by the Doctor. 5. In this context and on the question of relaxation of attendance norms, grace or extra attendance, we may fruitfully refer decision in Sukriti Upadhyay Vs. University of Delhi, LPA 539/2010 decided on 4th October, 2010, wherein this Court has stated thus:- "11. In Kiran Kumari (supra), another Division Bench of this Court referred to the decisions in Baldev Raj Sharma v. Bal Council of India & Ors., 1989 Supp. (2) SCC 91, Bar Council of India & Another v. Aparna Basu Mallick & Ors., (1994) 2 SCC 102, S.N. Singh (supra) and expressed the view as under: "13. In the light of the above, we find it difficult to appreciate as to how the requirements of 66% in each subject or as a condition of eligibility for appearance in the examination or the requirement of 66% attendance in the aggregate for purposes of granting the benefit of condonation in the shortfall can be said to be either illegal or arbitrary. The decisions delivered by the Supreme Court and by this Court to which we have referred abo