In what could prompt educational institutions to check antecedents of all students before being admitted in future, the Punjab and Haryana high court has allowed a student of Maharshi Dayanand University (MDU), Rohtak, who had passed his qualifying examination from an unrecognised board, to complete his degree.
The decision of HC bench of justice SS Sandhawalia came on the petition of one Rajeshwar Verma, a Faridabad resident, who was refused admit card for fourth semester examination of Bachelor of Technology (BTech) in 2014, after two years of admission.
The reason given by the MDU was that his Class-12 examination certificate was from a board which was found fake.
The petitioner challenged the decision of MDU stating that at the time of admission, the respondent university and the college where he took admission should have verified the documents and that the board was not in the list of fake boards at that time.
On the other hand, the university told the court that Board of Secondary Education, Madhya Bharat, Gwalior had not been recognised by the Haryana State Education Board, Bhiwani and therefore, admission granted to him was illegal.
It was argued that the permission to pursue the 2nd and 3rd semester was on the presumption that the candidate was eligible and college had duly scrutinised the documents.
{{/usCountry}}It was argued that the permission to pursue the 2nd and 3rd semester was on the presumption that the candidate was eligible and college had duly scrutinised the documents.
{{/usCountry}}However, the petitioner argued that the documents were supplied to the university in September 2012 and he was formally conveyed by the MDU of its decision only in May 2014.
The high court allowed the student to complete his study ruling that the university was itself responsible and failed to decide the issue for two long years and the candidate cannot be made to suffer for the lapse of the university.
The petitioner will be permitted to continue in the BTech course from the stage where he was denied permission to sit in the 4th semester examination, the HC ruled.
Referring to various similar judgments of the past, the HC bench stated that relief could be granted to students in the absence of any fraud and misrepresentation on their part and on the failure of the institute to inform them about their ineligibility.