TMI Blog2010 (7) TMI 985X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the results of her examinations which were held in December, 1998. 2. The dispute arose when the respondent felt aggrieved by the action of the appellant refusing to confer the degree of B.Ed. on her. The background of the facts giving rise to the case was that the respondent took admission in the academic session of 1994-95 as a regular student to pursue the course of M.A. in Political Science from Government College, Gurgaon. The respondent appeared in the Part-II Examination in May, 1995 as a regular candidate and in the same academic session of 1994-95 she also applied for admission in the B.Ed. (correspondence course) without disclosing the fact that she was already pursuing the regular course of M.A. in Political Science. The University at the time of preparation of the results of M.A. in Political Science discovered that the respondent had been pursuing her B.Ed. course in violation of Clause 17(b) of the General Rules of Examination and accordingly the respondent was informed that in view of the aforesaid rules she should exercise her option to choose anyone of the courses. 3. The respondent voluntarily and consciously opted for pursuing her course of M.A. in Politi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the ratio of the said decision and the peculiar facts of the case, the respondent was entitled for the relief claimed and accordingly the appellant was directed to issue the B.Ed. degree. 7. Shri Tarun Gupta, Ld. counsel appearing for the appellant has made three pronged submissions. He contends that the complaint could not have been entertained as the refusal of the appellant not to award the B.Ed. degree was well within its jurisdiction and it was not service much less a consumer service as defined under the Act for the District Forum to entertain the complaint. The second submission of Shri Gupta is that the rules as noted hereinabove did not allow a student to pursue two courses simultaneously and therefore, the attempt made by the respondent without disclosing the fact of having already taken up another course i.e. Political Science in post-graduation disentitled her from any relief. As a corollary to the said submission, he submits that non-disclosure of this fact, therefore, did not entitle her to the award of B.Ed. degree more so, when her examination had already been cancelled and the order cancelling her examination had not been properly challenged. The third submissi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... counsel for the appellant has, therefore, to be accepted that the Rule being prohibitory in nature, the District Forum or the National Commission could not have issued a direction which violates the aforesaid statutory provision. It is settled legal proposition that neither the Court nor any tribunal has the competence to issue a direction contrary to law and to act in contravention of a statutory provision. 10. The Court has no competence to issue a direction contrary to law nor the Court can direct an authority to act in contravention of statutory provisions. In State of Punjab Ors. Vs. Renuka Singla Ors., (1994) 1 SCC 175, dealing with a similar situation, this Court observed as under:- We fail to appreciate as to how the High Court or this Court can be generous or liberal in issuing such directions which in substance amount to directing the authorities concerned to violate their own statutory rules and regulations....... 11. Similarly, in Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation Vs. Ashrafulla Khan Ors., AIR 2002 SC 629, this Court held as under:- The High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution is required to enforce rule of law and not pass order o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ause there can be no estoppel against a statute. 17. There can be no estoppel/promissory estoppel against the Legislature in the exercise of the legislative function nor can the Government or public authority be debarred from enforcing a statutory prohibition. Promissory estoppel being an equitable doctrine, must yield when the equity so requires. (vide Dr. H.S. Rikhy etc. Vs. The New Delhi Municipal Committee, AIR 1962 SC 554; M.I. Builders Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Radhey Shyam Sahu Ors., (1999) 6 SCC 464; Shish Ram Ors. Vs. State of Haryana Ors., (2000) 6 SCC 84; Chandra Prakash Tiwari Ors. Vs. Shakuntala Shukla Ors., (2002) 6 SCC 127; I.T.C. Ltd. Vs. Person Incharge, AMC, Kakinada Ors., AIR 2004 SC 1796; State of U.P. Anr. Vs. Uttar Pradesh Rajya Khanij Vikas Nigam Sangharsh Samiti Ors., (2008) 12 SCC 675; and Sneh Gupta Vs. Devi Sarup Ors., (2009) 6 SCC 194). 18. On the other hand, the conduct of the respondent was such that even though she had no statutory right or any vested right to pursue her B.Ed. course, the mistake on the part of the appellant to allow her to appear in the examination cannot be by any logic treated to be a conduct of the appellant to confer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s. The process is not therefore availment of a service by a student, but participation in a general examination conducted by the Board to ascertain whether he is eligible and fit to be considered as having successfully completed the secondary education course. The examination fee paid by the student is not the consideration for availment of any service, but the charge paid for the privilege of participation in the examination. 13. The object of the Act is to cover in its net, services offered or rendered for a consideration. Any service rendered for a consideration is presumed to be a commercial activity in its broadest sense (including professional activity or quasi-commercial activity). But the Act does not intend to cover discharge of a statutory function of examining whether a candidate is fit to be declared as having successfully completed a course by passing the examination. The fact that in the course of conduct of the examination, or evaluation of answer- scripts, or furnishing of mark-sheets or certificates, there may be some negligence, omission or deficiency, does not convert the Board into a service-provider for a consideration, nor convert the examinee into a consu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
