news details |
|
|
| HC dismisses petitions seeking regularization of admission of petitioners in B Ed | | | Early Times Report
JAMMU, May 27: Justice Ali Mohammad Magrey while dismissing the bunch of petitions observed that petitioners in petitions who have taken admission to two-year B. Ed Course in different Colleges of the Valley have done same on their own, without following the due procedure prescribed in the Statute of the Respondent-University.
The petitioners did not respond to the admission notice issued by the Respondent-University in time, but after expiry of the stipulated time period, claim to have secured admission directly in the College concerned which is contrary to the admission policy followed by the Respondent-University. Besides, admittedly, no Registration Returns (RRs) have been forwarded to the respondent-University within the fixed timeframe by the concerned Colleges regarding the admission of the Petitioners.
In such circumstances, the action of the Respondent-University in denying the regularization/ confirmation of the admission of the Petitioners cannot be said to be illegal or contrary to the procedure governing the field.
Justice Magrey further observed that it, needs, must be said here that in terms of the Statute in vogue in the Respondent-University, a B. Ed College affiliated with the Respondent-University is prohibited from making admission to B. Ed course on its own.
It thus follows that any admission made in violation of the University Statutes would not be binding on the University and that the University would be under no obligation to regularize/ confirm such admission.
Once the Petitioners did not follow this procedure for seeking admission to the B. Ed course and purportedly sought admission from the Colleges on their own, the respondent-University is under no obligation to regularize/ confirm such admission.
Justice Magrey observed that in the light of the above discussion, it is abundantly clear that any direction to the Respondent University to regularize the admission of the Petitioners in violation of the University Statute would be impermissible and not in tune with the principles that must guide exercise of Writ jurisdiction. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
