- Bookmark
- Share
- CaseIQ
Surendra Kumar Mittal v. University Of Rajputana
Legal Opinion Summary
Factual and Procedural Background
This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India brought by Surendra Kumar Mittal. The petitioner: (a) passed the Hindi Honours (Prabhakar) Examination of the Punjab University in 1950; (b) thereafter appeared separately in two subjects — English and Politics — and obtained a provisional certificate from Punjab University certifying that he had passed the B.A. examination held in April 1954 under Regulation 7-D and was eligible for the degree. The petitioner obtained admission to the M.A. (Previous) class in Hindi at Maharaja's College (affiliated to the Rajputana University) and sought admission to the LL.B (Previous) class at the University Law College of Rajputana University.
The Principal of the University Law College declined to admit the petitioner on the ground that he was not qualified. The petitioner contended that the Punjab University certificatory/degree was recognised as equivalent to the corresponding Rajputana University examination and therefore, under the University rules (including Ordinance 252), he was qualified for admission to LL.B. He approached the Registrar; the Principal's view was upheld. The petition named the University of Rajputana, the Registrar, and the Principal of the University Law College as respondents.
On behalf of the University it was asserted that the examinations passed by the petitioner did not amount to having passed the B.A. examination of the Punjab University (in the sense required), that admission to M.A. had been erroneously permitted by the College, and that the petitioner did not possess the necessary qualification for M.A. or LL.B. admission. The University also pleaded that admission decisions rested with college authorities, and refusal to admit students not meeting required standards was within educational authorities' powers.
Legal Issues Presented
- Whether the petitioner, having obtained a provisional certificate from the Punjab University under its Regulation 7 (Prabhakar route and separate appearances in English and an elective), holds "the Bachelor's degree of any Indian University recognised for the purpose by the Syndicate with full course prescribed for the degree" as required by Ordinance 252 of the Rajputana University for admission to LL.B (Previous).
- Whether the Registrar's circulars and subsequent Academic Council / Syndicate resolutions and explanations altered or created eligibility entitling the petitioner to admission to M.A. or LL.B. classes despite not having taken the full course in a single attempt as prescribed by the Punjab University for the B.A. degree.
Arguments of the Parties
Petitioner's Arguments
- The petitioner relied on the provisional certificate issued by Punjab University certifying that he had passed the B.A. examination (April 1954) under Regulation 7‑D and was therefore eligible for the degree.
- He argued that the Punjab University is a University represented on the Inter-University Board and that Regulation 44 recognises degree examinations of Universities represented on that Board as equivalent to corresponding Rajputana University examinations; accordingly, his certificate/qualification entitled him to admission to the LL.B. previous class.
- The petitioner also relied on circulars/communications from the Registrar (including the June 16, 1953 circular) which appeared to allow oriental candidates who had passed by instalments to be admitted to M.A. classes, and he contended that admission to M.A. implied eligibility for LL.B. classes.
Respondents' / University's Arguments
- The University maintained that the petitioner's examinations did not amount to having passed the B.A. examination in the sense required for a degree with the "full course prescribed for the degree" under Ordinance 252. The Punjab scheme requires English as a compulsory subject plus two other subjects in a single B.A. course; the petitioner had not passed the full course in the same attempt.
- The University argued that the admission to M.A. that occurred was erroneously made and that, irrespective of eligibility, the actual admission is within the discretion of the Principal or college authorities.
- The University relied on ordinances, regulations, and the Academic Council / Syndicate interpretations which, as later explained, excluded candidates who obtained the Punjab University B.A. after passing Prabhakar (Honours in Hindi) followed by B.A. in English plus one elective from eligibility to M.A. and to LL.B. admission.
- It was also argued that certain Syndicate resolutions (including clarification concerning holders of other Bachelor's degrees such as M.B.B.S. or B.E.) did not assist the petitioner because those resolutions were meant to clarify inclusion of other professional Bachelor's degrees and not to validate the petitioner's mode of obtaining the Punjab B.A.
Table of Precedents Cited
No precedents were cited in the provided opinion.
Court's Reasoning and Analysis
The court proceeded by reference to the structure and provisions of the Rajputana University Act, the University constitution and the relevant ordinances, together with the Punjab University regulations and the communications between university officers:
- The court examined the Rajputana University legislation and delegations: Sections 23 and 23A (powers and functions of the Academic Council, including proposals regarding admissions and equivalence), Sections 28–31 (statutes, ordinances and regulations-making procedures), and the specific ordinance relating to admission to the Faculty of Law (Ordinance 252).
- Ordinance 252 was critical: it required that a candidate must have the Bachelor's degree "of the University or of an Indian University recognised for the purpose by the Syndicate, with full course prescribed for the degree," and that after such degree the candidate must complete a regular one-year law course in an affiliated college to be admitted to the LL.B. previous examination.
- The court analysed the Punjab University scheme (Calendar, regulations) and Regulation 7 which set out the conditions under which candidates who passed Oriental (classical) or modern Indian language examinations might be eligible for the B.A. The Punjab scheme required English (compulsory) and two electives as the full course for B.A.; certain exemptions existed only for high‑proficiency examinations in oriental classical languages (e.g., Sanskrit, Persian, Arabic) where those high proficiency passes could be treated as the language pass for B.A.
- The court found a material distinction between (a) a degree examination of the Punjab University recognised as equivalent to the Rajputana degree examination and (b) an examination (or certificate) which merely qualifies a candidate for obtaining a degree by instalments or under a specialized pathway. The petitioner had not, in fact, taken the B.A. degree with the full course in the sense required by the Punjab University: he had not passed the third subject prescribed for B.A. in the required manner, and the Prabhakar (Hindi Honours) was not in the Punjab Calendar treated as equivalent to the B.A. Hindi pass for Rajputana University's purposes.
- The court reviewed the Registrar's circulars and the Academic Council resolution of 7 February 1953. The Registrar's March 19, 1953 circular had informed colleges that certain candidates who had passed B.A. by instalments were being allowed to continue "at their own risk" and would be given certificates but not degrees until inter‑university recognition was settled; it advised that such students should not be admitted to any course until the matter was decided. The June 16, 1953 circular, however, stated that the Academic Council had resolved to allow certain oriental candidates to appear for M.A. examinations, and that such students who had passed the Punjab B.A. by instalments were eligible for admission to M.A. classes. A subsequent explanatory circular (17 July) clarified that the intention of Ordinance 252 was that the Bachelor's degree should be obtained with the full course and in the same attempt, and that the concession to oriental candidates for M.A. did not extend to eligibility for LL.B.
- The court analysed the textual meaning of the Academic Council resolution and the ambiguous phrase "an oriental examination recognised for the purpose by the Syndicate." It interpreted that phrase to mean an oriental examination recognised by the Syndicate for the purpose of appearing at the B.A. examination (i.e., recognised as qualifying to appear at B.A.), rather than a recognition for postgraduate admission. The Rajputana University handbook itself recognised certain oriental classical examinations (Shastri, Maulvi Fazil, Munshi Fazil) as qualifying for B.A., whereas Prabhakar (Hindi Honours) of Punjab University was recognised only as qualifying for Intermediate. That distinction supported the court's view that the petitioner's route was not equivalent to the full B.A. course required by Ordinance 252.
- The court noted that a Committee of the Academic Council recommended (20 July 1954) that candidates who obtain Punjab B.A. after first passing Prabhakar or Gyani and then the B.A. in English and an elective should not be eligible for admission to M.A. or M.O.L. The Syndicate on 31 July 1954 accepted that recommendation, resolving that candidates who obtained the Punjab B.A. after passing oriental examinations not recognised by Rajputana for B.A. purposes would not be eligible for Rajputana postgraduate admission.
- The court rejected the petitioner's further reliance on a separate Syndicate resolution (No. 3 of 31 July 1954) which stated that, given the wording of O. 252, there was no reason why holders of various Bachelor's degrees (e.g., M.B.B.S., B.E.) should be debarred from law courses. The court explained this resolution's background: it was a clarification that other professional Bachelor's degrees were included within the phrase "Bachelor's degree" and was not intended to validate the petitioner's mode of obtaining the Punjab B.A. Hence that resolution did not assist the petitioner.
- On this foundation the court concluded that the petitioner had not obtained a Bachelor's degree "with full course prescribed for the degree" as required by Ordinance 252 and the University authorities' clarified interpretation, and therefore he was not qualified for admission to LL.B. (Previous).
Holding and Implications
Holding: The petition is dismissed. The court held that the petitioner was not qualified for admission to the LL.B. (Previous) class because he did not possess the Bachelor's degree "of an Indian University recognised for the purpose by the Syndicate with full course prescribed for the degree" as required by Ordinance 252; the petitioner's route (Prabhakar followed by separate passes) did not amount to such a degree for Rajputana University's purposes.
Implications:
- The direct effect is that the petitioner is not entitled to admission to the LL.B. (Previous) classes of the University Law College; the University and college authorities were correct in refusing admission on the stated ground.
- The court treated the Syndicate's later resolutions and the Academic Council / Committee recommendations as authoritative explanations of Ordinance 252 (not as formally enacted ordinances) and accepted the Syndicate's clarification excluding candidates who obtained Punjab B.A. via the Prabhakar-plus-instalment route from eligibility to Rajputana postgraduate and law admissions.
- The court did not award costs to the respondents, noting that the confusion arose from Registrar circulars and the ambiguous language of the University ordinances and communications; thus while the petition failed on merits, no costs were imposed.
- No broader legal precedent beyond the interpretation of the University's ordinances and the application to the petitioner's facts is stated; the decision applies the University's statutory scheme and internal resolutions to deny eligibility in the particular circumstances of this case.
Bapna, J.:— This is a petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India.
2. The petitioner, Surendra Kumar Mittal, passed the Hindi Honours (Prabhakar) Examination of the Punjab University in the year 1950, and thereafter appeared in two subjects, English and Politics, separately, and obtained a provisional certificate of the said University that he had passed the B.A examination of the Punjab University held in April, 1954, under Regulation 7-D, and was eligible for degree. The petitioner obtained admission to the M.A (previous) class in Hindi of the Maharaja's College affiliated to the Rajputana University, and wanted admission to the LL.B (previous) class in the University Law College. The Principal of the Law College declined to admit him on the ground that he was not qualified for admission. The petitioner contended that he had passed the degree examination of the Punjab University, which was recognised as equivalent to the corresponding examination of the Rajputana University, and under the rules of the University was qualified for admission to the LL.B previous class. He approached the Registrar of the University, but the views of the Principal were upheld. It was prayed that the respondents be directed to admit the petitioner to the LL.B previous class of the University Law College. The University of Rajputana, the Registrar of the University, and the Principal of the University Law College were made respondents. On behalf of the University it was stated that the examinations passed by the petitioner did not amount to having passed the B.A examination of the Punjab University and the admission to M.A class by the Maharaja's College was erroneously made and that he did not possess the necessary qualification for admission either to the M.A or LL.B class of the University. It was further pleaded that apart from eligibility, the matter of admission rested entirely with the Principal of the College or head of the institution, and the refusal to admit a student who had not obtained a particular standard in examination was within the power of the educational authorities.
3. The case was argued on behalf of the University by Mr. K.S Hajela, who also happens to be the Principal of the University Law College.
4. The constitution of the University is laid down by the University of Rajputana Act, 1946.
5. Sec. 23 permits the setting up of an Academic Council, and sec. 23A(1) lays down that—
“The Academic Council shall have control and general regulation of, and be responsible for the maintenance of the standards of teaching and examination within the University,”
6. Under sub-sec. (2) certain special functions have been laid down without prejudice to the generality of the above mentioned provision, and it includes the power—
“(ii) to propose to the Syndicate ordinances concerning admission to the University or to its examinations, courses of study and curricula, schemes of examination, and attendance, (with certain restrictions with which we are not concerned);
(vii) to advise the Syndicate regarding equivalence of examinations and recognition of the examinations of other bodies.
7. Sec. 28 sets out the statutes of the University and provides for the amendment and repeal of the same by the Senate. Sub-sec. (3) provides that—
“The Syndicate may propose to the Senate the draft of any statute to be passed by the Senate. Such draft shall be considered by the Senate at its next meeting. The Senate may pass the statute, or a part of it, in the from in which it has been proposed, or may reject the statute or part of it, or may return the statute to the Syndicate for reconsideration, either in whole or in part, together with any amendments which the Senate may suggest.”
8. Sec. 29 authorises the Syndicate to make ordinances consistent with the Act and statutes, which may provide, among other things, conditions under which students shall be admitted to courses of study and curricula and examinations for degrees, diplomas and other academic distinctions.
9. Sec. 30 lays down the procedure for making ordinances. They are to be made by the Syndicate provided that no ordinance concerning admission to the University or to its examinations, courses of study, schemes of examination, attendance, and appointment of examiners is to be considered unless a draft of sue: ordinance has been proposed by the Academic Council. The Syndicate is not empowered to amend any draft proposed by the Academic Council, but may reject it or return it to the Academic Council for reconsideration either in whole or in part, together with any amendments which the Syndicate may suggest. Under sub-sec. (3) all ordinances made by the Syndicate are to be submitted to the Senate, and to be considered by the Senate at its next meeting. The Senate has under certain conditions power to cancel any ordinance made by the Syndicate.
10. Under sec. 31, the Academic Council has the power, subject to the approval of the Syndicate, to make regulations, consistent with the Act, statutes and ordinances, providing for all matters which by the Act the statutes or the ordinances are to be provided for by regulations and for all other matters solely lying within its purview.
11. The ordinances relating to admission of students to the examination of the faculty of law provides by ordinance 252 that—
“A candidate who, after taking the Bachelor's degree of the University or of an Indian University recognised for the purpose by the Syndicate, with full course prescribed for the degree, has completed a regular course of study in an affiliated college for one academic year in law shall be admitted to the previous examination for the degree of Bachelor of Laws.”
12. The petitioner does not hold a Bachelors's degree of the Rajputana University, and the question for determination is whether he holds “the Bachelor's degree of any Indian University recognised for the purpose by the Syndicate with full course prescribed for the degree.” The Punjab University is no doubt an Indian University. Clause (a) of Regulation 44 mentions that the degree examinations of all Universities represented on the Inter-University Board are recognised as equivalent to the corresponding examinations of the University. It is conceded that the Punjab University is one of the Universities represented on the Inter-University Board. It is contended for the petitioner that the provisional certificate of the Punjab University certifying that he has passed the Bachelor of Arts examination of the Punjab University, which, as mentioned above, is equivalent to the Bachelor of Arts examination of the Rajputana University, entitles him to admission to the LL.B previous class of the University. The contention, though plausible, is, in our opinion, not correct.
13. According to the scheme of the Punjab University there is provision first of all for Bachelor of Arts and Bachelor of Science examinations. These regulations are printed at pages 13 to 32 of the Calendar of the Punjab University, Volume II (1950–1951). A candidate is required to take up for his examination three subjects, of which one is to be English, and the other two being elected from the 13 subjects mentioned for the B.A examination, and any one of the 19 combinations mentioned for the B. Sc examination. At page 116 are regulations for the examinations for diplomas and literary titles in oriental classical languages, and at page 121 are regulations for examinations for certificates in modern Indian languages. At page 124 are regulations for examinations to qualify in English after passing the examination in an oriental classical language or a modern Indian language, and these regulations provide, among other things, by regulation 7th that—
“A candidate shall be eligible for admission to the degree of Bachelor of Arts under these regulations if—
(a) he has passed Honours examination in an oriental classical language and has qualified in English of the B.A standard under regulation 3 above;
(b) he has qualified in English of the Intermediate standard after passing an examination in a modern Indian language and subsequently first passes an Honours examination in an oriental classical language and then qualifies in English of the B.A standard;
(c) he has qualified in English of the B.A standard after taking Honours in a modern Indian language and then passes the Honours examination in a classical language.
(d) he has qualified in English of the B.A standard after having passed either Honours in Hindi (Prabhakar) or Honours in Punjabi (Gyani) examination and subsequently passes in one elective subject prescribed for the B.A examination, other than Hindi or Punjabi.
A candidate appearing in one elective subject under clause (d) must obtain 40 per cent marks to get a pass required under regutations relating to B.A examination.”
14. On behalf of the University it is urged that there is a distinction between a degree examination of the Punjab University which is recognised as equivalent to the degree examination of the Rajputana University, and an examination, though not a degree examination, qualifies a candidate for obtaining a degree of the Punjab University. In our opinion the distinction, though fine, is nevertheless real. This distinction is emphasised by the ordinance for admission of students to the Faculty of Law when it is said in respect of a degree of an Indian University that such degree should be one ‘recognised for the purpose by the Syndicate and with full course prescribed for the degree’. The full course prescribed for the degree of Bachelor of Arts by the Punjab University, as mentioned above, is English as compulsory subject, and any two other subjects. The candidate in the present case has passed in English and Political Science, but not in the third subject prescribed for B.A examination. He has no doubt, passed the Prabhakar examination in Hindi but it is nowhere laid down in the Calendar of the Punjab University that the passing of Parbhakar Examination is equivalent to the passing in Hindi of the B.A examination. It may be mentioned that as regards an oriental classical language the regulations provide that the passing of high proficiency examination in Sanskrit, Arabic, or Honours in Persian will exempt the candidate from passing in that language the examination of the Bachelor of Arts, and the marks obtained by him shall be taken to be the marks obtained at the Bachelor of Arts examination. The regulations of the Punjab University thus make a distinction between the case of passing an examination in a classical oriental language and passing an examination in a modern Indian language. The petitioner, therefore, has not taken the degree of the Punjab University with full course prescribed for the degree.
15. Some confusion seems to have arisen Page: 171by the correspondence made by the Registrar of the University with the Principals of Postgraduate Colleges, which made the petitioner to understand that he was qualified for admission to the M.A class in Hindi and also to the LL.B previous class. On 19th March, 1953, the Registrar wrote to the principal of post-graduate colleges including the Law College that—
“I am to inform you that the candidates, who have passed the B.A examination of the Punjab University by instalments i.e who, having passed the Honours examination in a modern Indian language and B.A examination of the same University in one more elective subject so as to be entitled for the full B.A degree, were allowed to continue their studies at their own risk. The matter of the recognition of such degrees has been referred by the Inter-university Board to a Sub-Committee. It is doubtful what the recommendation of the Committee will be and to what extent it will be adopted by the various Universities. To mitigate the hardships of these students (though they have joined at their own risk) all that can be done is to allow them to appear for the examinations and give them a certificate of having passed them if they do so, and not a degree. If in future the recognition is granted as a result of deliberations at Inter-university level, the degree will be given in place of the certificate. But it must be made clear to the candidates that the present decision of the university is to grant them only a certificate.
I am further to inform you that until the matter is decided, such students should not be admitted to any course.”
16. On the 16th June, 1953, the Registrar wrote to the principals of various post graduate colleges that—
“The Academic Council at its meeting on the 7th February, 1953, resolved that the oriental candidates, who after passing Hindi (Honours) examinations pass their B.A examinations in English only and also in one elective subject may be allowed to appear at the M.A examination of the University. The resolution of the Academic Council was approved by the Syndicate at its meeting held on the 15th March, 1953. As such, such students who have passed the B.A examination of the Punjab University by instalments are eligible for admission to the M.A classes.”
17. Learned counsel for the petitioner strongly relied on this circular of the Registrar as clearly entitling the petitioner to admission in M.A class, and it was urged that the University permitted students eligible for admission in M.A classes as eligible also for admission in LL.B class.
18. The Registrar on 17th July, sent another circular to the principals of the post graduate colleges as an explanation of the letter of 16th June, 1953, that the intention by reference to ordinance 252 was that the candidate should have taken the Bachelor's degree with full course prescribed for the degree and pass the examination in the same attempt, and that according to the implication of this ordinance graduates of the Punjab University who take the Bachelor's degree in one elective subject (or two in separate instalments) after passing the oriental examination and the B.A examination in English are clearly not eligible for admission to law course, and that students who have passed in two elective subjects at the same attempt way however be admitted, and the concession granted by the University to the oriental candidates who have passed their B.A examination of the Punjab University in one elective subject after passing their B.A examination in English permits them to prosecute their further studies for M.A (previous) examination of this University only in the subject of the oriental examination or related to it or in any one of the other elective subjects in which they have passed the B.A examination, and that these rules have no bearing on their eligibility for admission to the LL.B classes.
19. The resolution of 7th February, 1953, which was sought to be interpreted by the Registrar, was, however, in the following words:—
“(b) No graduate shall be admitted to a post graduate examination of the University, unless he has passed the examination for the Bachelor's degree (B.A, B.Sc, or B.Com) in all the compulsory and optional subjects ordinarily required for such an examination, or he has passed a post-graduate examination conducted by this University or any other University in India recognised for the purpose by the Syndicate.
Provided that a candidate who has passed an oriental examination recognised for the purpose by the Syndicate and also the B.A examination in English only (General English and English Literature) and in one of the other subjects comprised under the faculty of Arts, except modern Indian or oriental classical language, conducted by this University or by any Indian University recognised for the purpose by the Syndicate, may be allowed, if otherwise eligible, to appear at the M.A (previous) examination of the University in the subject of the oriental examination or related to it or in any one of the other elective subjects in which he has passed the B.A examination.”
20. The Resolution emphasised “an oriental examination recognised for the purpose by the Syndicate”. It is not clear whether the oriental examination meant an examination in oriental classical language or an examination in modern Indian language. The distinction assumes importance so far as the Rajputana University is concerned, for in Chapter XXX of the Handbook of the University of Rajputana (ordinance 167) which lays down qualifications for admission to an examination of the University, Shastri examination in Sanskrit, the Maulvi Fazil in Arabic or the Munshi Fazil examination in Persian Page: 172of the Punjab University is recognised as an oriental examination qualifying for admission to the B.A examination, while Prabhakar (Honours in Hindi) examination conducted by the Punjab University was only recognised as qualifying for admission to Intermediate examination. The language used oriental examination recognised for the purposed by the Syndicate” is not happy. What is intended is “an oriental examination recognised for the purpose of appearing at the B.A examination by the Syndicate”. If the words ‘of appearing at the B.A examination’ are not read in the sentence, the only other meaning would be ‘for the purpose of admission to postgraduate examination’, but throughout the Calendar of the Rajputana University there is no mention of any oriental examination being recognised for the purpose of admission to a post-graduate examination of the Rajputana University. By reading the words as indicated the resolution becomes understandable that the candidate who has passed B.A examination of the Punjab University after having qualified in Shastri, Maulvi Fazil or Munshi Fazil examination and has passed in one subject other than English becomes eligible to appear at the M.A previous examination in the subject of Oriental Examination or in any one of the other elective subjects in which he has passed the B.A examination. This rule would benefit the candidates who have qualified in an oriental classical language and as mentioned above there is distinction in the Punjab University itself between candidates passing in oriental classical language and candidates passing in modern Indian language.
21. The question was considered again by the Academic Council and a Committee was appointed to go into this question and the Committee by its Resolution of 20th July, 1954, recommended by Resolution No. 1 that—
“Candidates who obtain the B.A degree of the Punjab University after passing first its Prabhakar examination or its Gyani examination and subsequently the B.A Examination in english as well as an elective subject be not held eligible for admission to the M.A or M.O.L examination of the University. Only such candidates as obtain the B.A degree of this University or any other University recognised as equivalent thereto after passing first an oriental examination which is recognised by this University for purposes of admission of candidates to its B.A examination in English only and subsequently the B.A examination in English as well as an elective subject be treated as eligible for admission to the M.A or M.O.L examinations.”
22. The Syndicate at its meeting of 31st July, 1954, accepted this recommendation by resolving that—
“Candidates, who obtain the B.A degree of the Punjab University or any other University after passing such oriental examinations as are not recognised by this University as a qualification for admission to its B.A examination in English only, be not held eligible for admission to the M.A or M.O.L examination of this University.”
23. It was argued by learned counsel for the University that this was an amendment of ordinance No. 252. But it may need only be said that this argument is without any foundation, for the ordinances are to be passed in a particular manner, and every resolution by the Syndicate does not amount to an ordinance. The said resolution is however by way of explanation to ordinance No. 252, and the Syndicate was well within its powers to state what was the meaning of the words recognised for the purpose by the Syndicate with full course prescribed for the degree with reference to a particular degree of the Punjab University. This resolution is a complete answer to the petitioner's case. But the petitioner further relied on resolution No. 3 of the Syndicate passed at its meeting on the same day (31st July, 1954) which was as follows—
“(3) Ref. Res. No. 9—In view of the present wording of O. 252 there appears to be no reason why a candidate, who has taken M.B.B.S degree, or B.B degree, or any other Bachelor's degree, should be debarred from entering law courses. All candidates who have taken a Bachelor's degree must, therefore, be deemed eligible to join law classes. The actual admission of candidates to the law classes would rest with the authorities of the college concerned. But the question of further clarification of O. 252, or amending it, be referred to the faculty of law.”
24. It was contended on the basis of the above resolution that every candidate who had taken the Bachelor's degree was entitled to join law classes. The back-ground of this resolution, however, makes it clear that this was a clarification as to the eligibility of candidates who had obtained degrees in medicine and engineering for admission to law classes. The question before the Academic Council at its meeting of 27th of July, 1954, was whether the Bachelor's degree referred to in ordinance 252 meant only the Bachelor's degree in arts, science and commerce or included all Bachelor's degrees, and the Academic Council by resolution No. 9 referred the matter to the Faculty of Law, but when the matter came up again before the Syndicate, the above resolution was passed, and it is obvious that the intention was to clarify that even candidates passing Bachelor's degree in medicine and surgery, or engineering were also eligible for admission to LL.B classes. The aforesaid resolution does not help the petitioner in any manner. In our opinion the petitioner was rightly held not qualified for admission to the LL.B previous examination, and therefore rightly refused admission to the law classes of the University.
25. The petttion has no force and is dismissed. We, howerer, do not allow costs Page: 173as the confusion arose out of the circular the unhappy language of the ordinances of issued by the officers of the University and the University.
Alert