Himachal Pradesh High Court
CWP/1956/2007 of HIMALAYAN INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT Vs H.P.UNIVERSITY on 29 December 2007
1956 & 1957 of 2007 29.12.2007 Present: Mr. Ramakant Sharma, counsel for the petitioners. Mr. V.D.Khidta, counsel for the respondents. The petitioners by means of these writ petitions have prayed that a special examination be held for the students of Master of Computer Application and Master
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
Arguments
CWP Nos. 1956 & 1957 of 2007
29.12.2007 Present: Mr. Ramakant Sharma, counsel for the petitioners.
Mr. V.D.Khidta, counsel for the respondents.
The petitioners by means of these writ petitions have prayed that a special examination be held for the students of Master of Computer Application and Master of Business Administration studying in the petitioner institution in question. The facts of the case are that admissions to these courses were held sometime in September/October, 2000. Since the time was short, the University had agreed to conduct special examination for the students of the petitioner institution subject to the condition that the expenditure of such examinations would be borne by the petitioner institution. However, we have now been informed that the students of the petitioner institution in both the courses have already sat and taken the examination conducted by the University in the month of November/December, 2007.
Learned counsel for the petitioners has prayed that the students of these institutions should have been given another chance and another special examination should be held for them. We cannot accept this submission. In case the students or the petitioner institutions felt that time was short, they should have protested and not taken the examination conducted in November/December, 2007. Once they have willingly, without any coercion, taken the examination in the aforesaid two courses, they cannot now be permitted to argue that fresh examinations be held for them. The petitions are accordingly rejected.
( Deepak Gupta ), J.
December 29, 2007(K)
( V. K. Ahuja ), J.