Exam taken by employed PG student void, declares Bench

The petitioner P Shanmugavalli had contended that while working as a lecturer in Mechanical Engineering in SA Polytechnic College, she got admission for ME in Anna University and was admitted in the engineering college for the academic year 2014-16.

On joining the course, she applied for leave and was relived of the post on February 28, 2015. But the jealousy of some people against her had resulted in a show cause notice against her on May 19, 2015, claiming she was working as a teaching faculty on a full-time basis in the said polytechnic college while studying as full-time student.

Subsequently, the Controller of Exams on April 23, 2017, cancelled all the four semester examinations she had appeared from 2014, she submitted and sought for a direction to quash the said order and enable her to continue the course.

Anna University in its counter cited a similar issue wherein a division bench of this court had held that the administrative decision unless mala-fide cannot be interfered with and that the very term full-time indicates that a full timer should be available in the institution during the complete working hours. 

Justice S Vaidyanathan on holding that it is not in dispute that the petitioner had joined ME (Full-time) and was simultaneously working as full-time faculty member, said, “The relevant rules and regulations of the Anna University does not permit to do the full-time course and the same is not valid in the eye of law and the degree, if any obtained is a void degree. The Controller of Examinations, Anna University, is fully justified in cancelling all the examinations appeared by the petitioner and re-do the course afresh.”

“The university/institution and the recognition authorities must ensure that no teacher is permitted to do the full-time course without obtaining prior permission from the University. Otherwise, that will give a wrong signal and that for the sake of convenience, the student may be asked to be a professor for showing strength and the institution may get the approval from AICTE and simultaneously allow them to study full time courses. The practice is deprecated,” Justice Vaidyanathan added.

The Madras High Court has held that students, who fail to qualify as per the admission norms, should not be admitted merely because seats are vacant in a college.

Disposing a plea moved by a student seeking grant of seat citing the prevailing vacancy in a college, Justice S Vaidyanathan said, “If the vacancy position is the criteria for accommodation of a student in a particular course, then it will be setting a wrong principle and the students who have scored lesser marks, will knock at the doors of the courts on the ground that the seats are vacant in a particular college in a particular course and that the students have to be accommodated.”

Dandage Rohini had moved the court seeking to direct Bharathi Women’s College (autonomous) to admit her for the 1st year MSc (Zoology) course for the academic year 2018-19. 

The government advocate appearing for the Education Secretary and Director of Collegiate Education submitted that during the certificate scrutiny it was found that the petitioner who had done her undergraduate course at Hyderabad in Osmania University belonged to SC community from Andhra Pradesh. When the other state candidates appear for counselling in Tamil Nadu, they will be considered under OC category. But the cut-off mark for MSc (Zoology) is 71.05 per cent and the petitioner had secured 61 per cent, which falls below the OC cut-off mark.

In reply, her counsel submitted that as there are several seats vacant, the case of the petitioner may be considered and allotted a seat.