Allahabad High Court
NIRMIT YADAVversusUNION OF INDIA AND 2 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- VINOD DIWAKAR
Holding
The court declined to grant mandamus and ordered the petitioner to file a representation before the university, which must decide the matter per applicable statutes and university rules.
Summary
The petitioner, Nirmit Yadav, filed a writ petition seeking a mandamus directing the university to award his B.Sc. (Ag.) degree, alleging that he had passed all examinations but that a clerical error showed zero marks in a remedial mathematics subject. The university contended that the petitioner had not passed the required Elementary Mathematics (Remedial) course, which is a prerequisite for the degree, and therefore could not issue it. The court examined the curriculum requirement and the alleged discrepancy in the mark sheet, noting that the petitioner had been promoted and graded for the academic session 2022-23. Finding that the matter required factual clarification, the court declined to issue mandamus and instead allowed the petitioner to file a representation before the university within three weeks. The university was directed to decide the representation in accordance with applicable statutes, rules, and university regulations, and to issue a reasoned order within three months.
Issues considered
- Whether the university is legally bound to issue the B.Sc. (Ag.) degree despite the alleged zero marks in the remedial mathematics subject.
- Whether a writ of mandamus is an appropriate remedy in the context of academic qualification disputes.
Subjects
- degree issuance
- university
- mandamus
- academic qualification
- remedial subject
- representation
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - C No. - 36674 of 2026
Nirmit Yadav
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
Union Of India And 2 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Mayank Chaturvedi, Surendra Kumar
Chaubey
Counsel for Respondent(s) : A.S.G.I., Kartikeya Saran, Manoj Kumar
Singh, Pooja Agarwal
Court No. - 38
HON'BLE VINOD DIWAKAR, J.
1. Heard counsel for the petitioner, Shri Kartikeya Saran, learned counsel for
the respondent-University and learned standing counsel representing the
State-respondents.
2. The present writ petition has been preferred for issuance of a direction in
the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent-University to award
the degree of B.Sc.AG to petitioner forthwith, within stipulated time.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has
successfully passed the B.Sc. (Ag.) examination and qualified all the
semesters. As per the curriculum, the petitioner was required to appear in
Course No. UGS-112, Elementary Mathematics (Remedial). However, the
University conducted the examination in Introductory Biology instead.
Though the petitioner passed the said subject and was promoted, the report
card incorrectly reflects UGS-111, Elementary Mathematics (Remedial),
with zero marks. The petitioner's promotion and Grade-C in the academic
session 2022-23 demonstrate that he had passed the examination. The
petitioner has completed all formalities for award of the B.Sc. (Ag.) degree,
but the degree has not yet been issued. Learned counsel, therefore, prays for
a direction to the respondent-University to issue the B.Sc. (AG) degree to the
petitioner within a stipulated period.
4. Shri Kartikeya Saran, learned counsel for the respondent-University,
submits that the petitioner was required to pass the subject of Elementary
Mathematics (Remedial) as per the prescribed curriculum. Since the
WRIC No. 36674 of 2026
2
petitioner has not passed the said subject, he has not fulfilled the required
academic qualification and, therefore, the University cannot issue the B.Sc.
(AG) degree to him at this stage.
5. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the present writ
petition is finally disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to file a
representation before the respondent-University, raising all his grievances
and enclosing the relevant documents, within three weeks from today. In
case such a representation is filed, the respondent-University shall decide the
same, in accordance with the applicable statutes, rules and relevant
provisions of the University, by a reasoned and speaking order, preferably
within a period of three months from the date of production of a certified
copy of this order.
September 21, 2026
A. Tripathi
(Vinod Diwakar,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
AKHILESH TRIPATHI
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…