D. K. Seth, J.-

The President of the Students Union has espoused the cause of students of Ewing Christian College to the effect that by reason of conferring autonomous status under Section 42 of the State Universities Act, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act', by the University of Allahabad, the said College has made certain changes in the method of examination by which the provision of allowing grace marks to a student who had scored 33.33% on the ground that the University of Allahabad allows grace marks if a student scores 33.33% whereas Ewing Christian College had allowed the same if a student scores 41% as well as by dispensing with examination of back papers, as are available to the students of Allahabad University. He has challenged this differentia on the ground of discrimination hitting Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Sri I. P. Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the College though granted autonomous status did not have any jurisdiction under Section 42 of the Act to vary the mode of examination which, according to him, can only be done by the University of Allahabad. Therefore, the action cannot be sustained.

2. Mr. R. K. Jain, learned counsel for the College contends that the writ petition is not maintainable because of the fact that the petition has been moved by the President of the Union who has been named and that he has already passed the last examination and he is no more a student of the said College and, therefore, he cannot espouse the cause of the students of the College. The second contention of Mr. Jain was that Section 42 empowers an autonomous College to vary the condition of examination. Chapter XX of the First Statute of the University of Allahabad which relates to autonomous College also empowers to effect change in the method of examination conducive cf maintaining the standard of education and such changes are done according to the decision of the College Academic Council which may set up a College Examination Committee for such pur­pose to whom the Academic Council may delegate such power in respect of examination. The only safeguard provided, according to him, is only by way of reporting to the Examination Committee of the University which had the power of suggesting changes thereto, if necessary. Therefore, according to him, the changes made are well within the powers of the College having legal sanction. He further submits that the changes made are legal and were only with the object to achieve a better standard of education in the said College and does not effect Section 42 of the Act. The University has also not raised any objection though the same has been reported long before and that no suggestion has yet come from the Univer­sity. Lastly he contends that before admission, the students were asked to give undertaking that these changes have been made in the mode and method of examination.

However, this last contention has been vehemently denied on the ground that this is incorrect. However this question of fact need not require to be gone iuto in the present case which is wholly immaterial for the pur­pose of deciding the issue involved, i, therefore, refrain from making any observation with regard to the last contention of Mr. Jain.

Section 42 of the Act lays down :

"42. Autonomous College.-(I) The University may grant in the manner prescribed, to an affiliated or associated college which satisfies the conditions prescribed in that behalf, the privileges of varying, for the students receiving instruction in such college, the courses of study prescribed by the University, and holding examination in the courses so varied."

(2) The extent to which the courses may be varied and the manner of holding the examination conducted by such college shall be determined in each case by the University.

"(3) Such a college shall be declared in the manner prescribed as an autonomous college."

"3. By reason of sub-section (1) of Section 42, autonomous status can be conferred by the University to any affiliated or associated College which satisfies the prescribed conditions. Upon such conferment of autonomous status, such College has the privilege of varying, the courses of study pres­cribed by the University and holding examination in the courses so varied. Sub-section (2) lays down that the courses so varied and the manner of holding the examination conducted by such College shall be determined in each case by the University."

4. In order to give effect to the provisions contained in the Act, the University of Allahabad has its own Statute by which the mode and manner of administration and decision in regard to the courses and examination are governed. The First Statute of the University of Allahabad in Chapter XX contains conditions relating to autonomous College. Para 20.08 lays down as follows :

"20.08 (i) Subject to the provisions of section 42, an Autonomous College shall be entitled-"

(a) to frame the courses in the subjects covered by in privileges ;

(b) to appoint persons qualified to be appointed as internal or external examiners in such subject ;

(c) to hold examinations and to make such change in the method of examination and teaching as in the opinion or conducive to the maintenance of the standard of education.

"(2) The Board of Faculties concerned, the Academic Council and the Examination Committee may consider the action taken by the Autonomous College under clause (1) and may suggest any change if necessary."

5. It appears from Para 20.08 (1) (2) that an autonomous College is entitled to hold examination and to make such changes in the method of examination as in their opinion conducive of maintaining the standard of education. The said autonomous power is provided with a safety valve in sub-para (2), namely, that the Board of Faculties, the Academic Council and the Examination Committee may consider the changes made by an autonomous College under Clause (1) and suggest any change if necessary.

"6. Admittedly in the present case, the University has not suggested any change. There is nothing to show that the University has ever felt any necessity of suggesting any change. Though the University has been served, it has not come forward with any case that it has suggested any such change."

7. The Ordinance on the function of Ewing Cristian College as an autonomous College had empowered the College Academic Council in para 7 which provides as follows :

"7. The College Academic Council may set up a College Examina­tion Committee and a College Admissions Committee to it in such matters pertaining to different aspects of the Examina­tion and Admission processes respectively, as it may specify, and may delegate to the said Committees such of its powers in respect of Examinations arid Admissions respectively, as it may deem fit:"

Provided that all the proceedings and recommendations of the College Examinations Committee in respect of the powers delegated to it by the College Academic Council shall be report­ed to the Examination Committee of the University :

"Provided further that the Examinations Committee of the Univer­sity may by resolution delegate such of its supervisory or final powers as it may deem fit, subject to such conditions as it may prescribe, in respect of the appointment of examiners and the conduct of examinations pertaining to the College, to the College Academic Council or the College Examinations Com­mittee, as the case may be."

8. Para 20.12 of the First Statute lays down :

"20.12. Subject to the provisions of Section 42(2) and of this Chapter, the courses of study and other conditions relating to an Autonomous College shall be such as may be laid down in the Ordinance."

"9. Therefore, the conditions laid down in para 7 is the guiding factor for the purpose. Para 7 of the Ordinance makes it clear that the College Academic Council is entitled to set up a College Examination Committee delegate such powers as it may deem fit. In the present case, so far as the question of delegation is concerned is not under question. Here the question relates to the changes effected. Whether autonomous College could effect such changes or not, that is the question with which we are now concern­ed. The first proviso to para 7 again puts down the safety measure by providing that the recommendations of the College Examination Committee made to the College Academic Council shall be reported to the Examination Committee of the University which by resolution may delegate such of its supervisory or final powers subject to such conditions in respect of the appointment of examiners to the College Academic Council."

10. Therefore, the net result is that an autonomous body is authorised to change the examination system or vary the method of examination. The only limitation is that it has to report the changes made to the Univer­sity and such changes are only subject to such suggestions of change by the University if the latter thinks so fit to do so. Therefore, there is no doubt that the changes can be effected by the autonomous College in the mode or method of examination. In the present case, no suggestion having come from the University, such changes cannot be thrown out. The changes that have been made have been brought to the notice of the Court by means of Annexure '8' to the counter-affidavit through which Mr. Jain had led me. It appears that the changes which have been made are that in the case of the University, the minimum pass mark is 33% of the aggregate while that of the autonomous College has been made 33.33%. Such a change is quite insignificant. The changes with regard to III Division Commensurate with the aggregate pass mark does not bring about any material alteration or variation. The major change, as has been pointed out by Mr. Srivastava was in the case of allowing grace-marks wherein the case of the University, grace mark is made available when the aggregate is 33% whereas it has been enhanced to 41% in the case of the autonomous College and that too at varying rate viz., varying with the percentage. If the percentage is higher grace mark is more. According to Mr. Srivastava, these changes are spectacular and makes a gulf of difference which is the main contentions that students reading in autonomous college should also be brought at par with the University in allowing grace mark.

11. The very concept of grant of autonomous status to a College is conceived with a view to having a better standard which can be maintained by an autonomous College and this was the reason why such liberty has been given. Therefore, the changes made for achieving better standard of education cannot be said to contradict Section 42 of the Act, Thus the autonomous Colleges stand at a different footing from that of the affiliated or associated Colleges. The students have a choice either to go to tha auto­nomous College or to affiliated or associated Colleges. If one makes a choice for autonomous College, it becomes subject to all the rules and powers enjoyed by the said autonomous College. A student has no locus standi to question such changes effected pursuant to authority received by reason of grant of autonomous status under Section 42 of the Act. If such standard is fixed for the purpose of achieving better standard of education the same cannot be objected to particularly by the students. It is only the University which might ask for changing such mode or method as brought about by way of changing by the autonomous College even not through direction of any imposition of the directive but by way of suggestion. Thus the expres­sion used in the statute clearly indicates that there are autonomy which is to be respected. In case it is taken that such change ought to be approved by the University in that event, the meaning of the expression 'autonomy evaporates in the air and if it is within the whole control without any auto­nomy in that event, there is no use for the purpose of granting autonomy to a particular College, though, however, the University has the ultimate control over It as provided in Section 42(2).

12. An examination of changes brought about to the grace mark seem, to my mind, as conducive for a better standard of education. Even then grace marks are given by way of grace to which a student cannot have a right. If a particular University or an autonomous College does not allow grace marks at all, a student cannot enforce such right to have grace marks. In any event if grace mark is given through a particular system on the basis of certain standard as appears from the changes brought about by autonomous College. I do not see any reason to find any infirmity in it. To my mind, the same does not create any discrimination or make any dis­tinction. The concept of qualification has to be taken with a rational approach.

13. The system of granting grace mark by autonomous College, even if is different from that of the University, the same cannot be discrimina­tory because of the reason that the College is autonomous and has been given such status by reason of Section 42 of the Act which empowers the College to vary the method of holding examination as is permitted under Para 22 08 of the First Statute of the University of Allahabad read with Para 7 of the Ordinance of Ewing Christian College.

14. Now turning to the question as to whether the petitioner has a right to espouse the cause of the students, though in my view, the petitioner cannot espouse the cause after he ceases to be a student of the College, but it seems there might be some substance in the submission made by Mr. Srivastava that he is eligible and entitled to continue unless a next President is elected and that there has been no further election and the petitioner is entitled to continue as President and, therefore, has locus standi to espouse the cause of other students and, therefore, the writ petition is maintainable I feel that it requires an examination of the Memorandum and Article of Association of the Union and the Rules and bye-laws relevant therefor. Since I have already held against the petitioner on merit, therefore, it is unnecessary to go into this question. Therefore, I refrain from dealing with the same.

15. At this stage, it is submitted by Mr. Srivastava that the last date for depositing forms for B. A., B. Sc. Part I, Part II and Part III Examina­tions is fixed tomorrow. The students who are eligible for such examina­tions may have opportunity to submit their forms by Monday the 18th of December, 1995 for the said purpose. This order will not entitle to any ineligible student to get the benefit.

16. In the facts and circumstances of the case, as observed above this writ petition has no merit and, as such, is dismissed. There will, how­ever, be no order as to costs.

Petition dismissed.