1 2025:CGHC:46096 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPC No. 4726 of 2025 Ku. Mala Mahanand D/o Sant Gyani Mahanand Aged About 30 Years R/o G-8, Phase-Ii, Gulshan Vatika, Sejbahar, District Raipur C.G. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Higher Education, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nava Raipur Atal Nagar, District Raipur C.G. 2 - Director, Directorate Of Technical Education Chhattisgarh, Indrawati Bhawan, Nava Raipur Atal Nagar, District Raipur C.G. 3 - Chhattisgarh Swami Vivekanand Technical University Bhilai, Thorugh Its Registrar, District Durg C.G. 4 - Columbia Institute Of Pharmacy, Through Its Principal, Mandhar, Tekari Vidhan Sabha Road, District Raipur C.G. ---- Respondent For Petitioner : Mr. Achyut Tiwari, Advocate For State : Mr. Ajit Singh, GA Hon'ble Shri Justice Arvind Kumar Verma Order on Board 10/09/2025 2 1. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is heard finally. 2. By way of this petition, petitioner sought following relief(s) : “10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for the entire records from the respondent authorities pertaining to the case of the petitioner. 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash/set aside impugned order passed by respondent No. 3 dated 11.08.2025 (Annexure P/11), in the interest of justice. 10.3 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authorities, to permit the petitioner to pursue and complete the remaining one- year course of B. Pharmacy consisting of 7th and 8th semesters, in accordance with law. 10.4 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct respondent authorities to accept the requisite fees, examination fees, and other charges from the petitioner for the 7th and 8th semesters of B. Pharmacy course and to allow her to appear in the studies & also in forthcoming examinations. 10.5 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other relief as it may deems fit and appropriate.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a student of B.Pharmacy in the College of respondent no.4. She cleared PPHT Examination in the year 2014 and got admission in the College of respondent no.4 for completion of course namely B. Pharmacy. She was continuously studying for 03 years upto 6 semester i.e. from year 2014 up to 2017. As petitioner's father namely Sant Gyani Mahanand was terminated on 04.11.2015 from 3 the post of Peon, financial condition of the petitioner's family was not good and therefore petitioner could not deposit requisite fees with the respondent college and respondent college debarred petitioner from her studies and did not allow petitioner to give examination. Recently, vide order dated 07.12.2023 passed by this Hon'ble Court in WP(S) No. 6318/2016 in favour of petitioner's father, as and when father of petitioner joined the services again, petitioner preferred an application on 28.12.2024 before the respondent authorities to allow her for further studies, again she preferred another application on 16.06.2025, when admissions are going to be taken place, When the respondent authorities neither considered the petitioner's application nor permitted her to pursue her further studies, the petitioner was constrained to prefer a writ petition before this Hon'ble Court in W.P.(C) No. 3654 of 2025, praying for a direction to the respondent authorities to consider and allow her to pursue her further studies. By order dated 15.07.2025, this Court directed the petitioner to file a application/representation along-with all documents and a copy of the said order before respondent No. 3, and further directed that respondent No. 3 shall decide the said representation in an objective manner and pass a reasoned order within a period of 30 days from the date of filing of the. representation, in accordance with law. Pursuant thereto, the petitioner submitted an application/representation along with all relevant documents and a copy of the said order before respondent 4 No. 3 оп 21.07.2025. However, the said representation came to be rejected by respondent No. 3 vide order dated 11.08.2025. Hence, the present petition. 4. Learned State counsel has made formal objection on the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record with utmost circumspection. 6. Considering the facts of the case and submission made by learned counsel for the parties. This is second round of litigation. Earlier petition has been filed before this Court and this Court has passed the order in WPC No.3654 of 2025 on 15.07.2025 (Annexure P-9). The relevant portion of the said order are as under : “5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case instead of keeping this petition pending, I find it appropriate to dispose of the same at this stage directing the petitioner to file a fresh application/representation along with all relevant documents and copy of this order before the respondent No. 3, in turn the respondent No. 3 is expected to decide the representation in an objective manner and to pass a reasoned order within a period of 30 days from the date of representation filed by the petitioner in accordance with law. 6. It is made clear that this Court has not observed anything on the merits of the case. 7. With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition is disposed of.” 5 7. Therefore, the concerned respondent has decided the representation made by the petitioner Annexure P/10 by rejecting the same by order dated 11.08.2025 vide Annexure P/11 mentioning that : “ आपके द्वारा वि श्ववि द्यालय के प्रेवित आ दनों के अ लकेनों से स्पष्ट है विके बी. फार्मेसे केसे र्मे आपके प्रे श सेत्र 2014 र्मे हुआ था ए & वि श्ववि द्यालय के अध्यदश क्रर्मे&के-16 के विनोंयर्मे 15.0 र्मे उल्लखि,त विनोंयर्मे से स्पष्ट है विके बी. फार्मेसे केसे प-र्ण केरानों के/ अधि1केतर्मे अ धि1 08 (आठ) है। आपके बी. फार्मेसे केसे र्मे नोंर्मे&केनों दिदनों5के से सेम्प-र्ण केसे अध्ययनों केरा प-र्ण विकेए जानों के/ सेर्मेय धि1 जा अधि1केतर्मे अ धि1 (08) आठ है, सेर्मेप्त है चु:के/ है अत; आपके वि यन्र्तगत> आ दनों के अस् के? त विकेय जात है।" 8. Subsequently, Counsel for the petitioner admitted that the petitioner had taken admission in the year 2014, therefore, 08 years of admission has been completed in the year 2022. Therefore, as per Rule 15.0 of University’s Ordinance No.16, maximum duration of course shall be 08 years would be applicable in this case. Hence, the respondent No.3 has rightly rejected the representation of the petitioner. 9. Accordingly, the instant petition is dismissed. 10. However, petitioner is at liberty to pursue the other remedy, if any available to the petitioner under the law. Sd/- (Arvind Kumar Verma) Judge Vasant