' Brief facts of the case are that petitioner joined B.B.A. Class of the respondent University for the session 2001-2003. The petitioner having successfully qualified to be promoted reached the fourth semester. He was still required to repeat some of the courses of first, second and third semester.
When he appeared for the examination of his fourth semester still he was required to repeat some of the courses of his previous semesters. After taking examination of the fourth semester, he obtained CGPA 1.96 while required CGPA to remain on the roll of the department was 2.0, thus he was dropped from the roll by the department. Hence this petition.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that according to clause G of the Regulation 8 of the statute, procedure, rules and regulations of BBA Programme, a student who is still required to repeat some of the courses is not required to obtain 2.0 CGPA. This condition is only applicable for those students who have already cleared all the courses of the previous semester and are not required to repeat any course. In order to further substantiate his contention, he contends that the later part of the same clause do indicate that a student who had cleared his fourth semester with more than 2.0 CGPA and is not required to repeat any of the previous courses shall further be required to obtain 2.20 CGPA.
3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent contends that clause B of the said regulation has an over-riding effect and all the students throughout their academic carrier in the B.B.A. Class are continuously required to maintain 'good standing' by way of acquiring not less than 2.0 CGPA in all semesters except first semester where the required CGPA is 1.75 for provisional promotion to second semester. However such student is also required to make up this deficiency bybrining his CGPA in the mark of 2.0. Learned counsel further argued that according to clause E of the Regulation 8, only the eligible students are required to repeat the failed courses and eligible are only those students who have obtained CGPA not less than 2.0. Since the petitioner has failed to obtain 2.0 CGPA, thus he was not eligible and thus dropped from the roll of the department. He has relied upon the judgment of this Court in Writ Petition No.7964 of 2003, I.C.A. No. 35 of 2003, 2002 M LD 1329 and PLD 1994 SC 507.
4. I have considered the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties.
5. For ready reference the relevant clauses of the Regulation 8 are reproduced as follows:-- "(A)In order to remain on the roll of the Department, a student has continuously to maintain 'Good Standing' namely, a satisfactory standard of attendance and academic performance, as well as of conduct and discipline.
(B) To remain in 'Good Standing' a student besides meeting attendance and conduct requirements, must also maintain a minimum CGPA of 2.0 on a cumulative basis. Any student with a CGPA of less than 2.0 will be dropped from the rolls of the Department forthwith.
(E) The students who are eligible to remain on the roll of the department but have failed in course
(s) are required to repeat these course (s) whenever these are offered by the department in morning/evening.
(G) At the end of the fourth Semester, the CGPA of a student who has not been required to repeat any course (s) should not be less than 2.00 otherwise he shall be removed from the rolls of the department. A student who has not been required to repeat any course (s) obtains CGPA of 2.00 but less than 2.20 at the end of the fourth Semester, may be allowed to repeat one or two courses of the third or fourth semester in which he had obtained the lowest grades, in order to improve the CGPA so as to obtain the minimum of 2.20 failing which he shall be removed from the rolls of the Department.
' No doubt, according to clause B of the said Regulation, the term "good standing" is defined as to the conduct of the student, his class attendance and his CGPA. All the three requirements should be upto the mark so that the student can be said to have maintained a "good standing" of his studies. This provision is of a general nature while clause G of the said Regulation specifically deals with the fourthsemester. According to this clause, the students have been bifurcated into two types of sets. One set is of those students who .Are not required to repeat any of the previous semesters.
Their requirement is to obtain CGPA not less than 2.0 and further required to raise their CGPA to the tune of 2.20 by appearing in those courses of the 3rd and 4th semester in which they had obtained lowest marks. The second set of students is of those students who are still left with some courses to be repeated while they appeared in the 4th semester. They are not required under this Regulation to acquire the CGPA of 2.0. They will repeat their courses, which they are still required and would then be assessed to have acquired 2.00 CGPA. Then they will further be required to obtain CGPA 2.20 to qualify for the degree. Had the clause B been a last and final word, then there was no need to introduce clause G specially for fourth semester and bifurcating the students into two types and sets. So far as the clause E is concerned, learned counsel for the respondent had laid much emphasis on the word "eligible". The eligibility to remain on roll a student in the fourth semester having less than 2.0 CGPA is provided in clause G, provided further he is still short of some courses of the lower semesters,. Clause F of the same Regulation is also worth noting which is reproduced as follows:-- "(F) At the end of the third Semester, the CGPA of a student should not be less than 2.00 otherwise he shall be removed from the rolls of the department."
According to this clause, if a student at the end of 3rd semester fails to obtain less than 2.0 CGPA, he will be straightway dropped from the roll of the department. There is no reservation in this clause regarding the pendency of his courses, while clause G do indicate that students who have yet to repeat some of the courses and those who are not so required are two different types of groups. Thus they are to be separately treated.
6. The judgments cited and relied upon by the learned counsel for the respondents are not relevant for the purposes of the instant case, inasmuch, as in none of these judgments the disputed Regulation, which is subject-matter of the instant case was under consideration.
7. For what has been stated above, this writ petition is allowed. It is declared that the petitioner was entitled to remain on the roll of the department and qualify his courses in accordance with the terms of clause G of the Regulation. No order as to costs.