Ms. Sneha Bhasin v. The University Grants Commission Through Its Chairman And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Letters Patent Appeal No.244 of 2019 In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11642 of 2018 ====================================================== Ms. Sneha Bhasin Wife of Siddharth Sehgal Resident of Bhasin Villa, Rajendra Nagar, Road No.6, Police Station- Kadamkuan, District- Patna. ... ... Appellant/s

Versus

1.

The University Grants Commission Through its Chairman, New Delhi 2.

The Central Board of Secondary Education, through its Secretary, H-149, Sector-63, Noida 3.

The Secretary, Central Board of Secondary Education, UGC, Net Unit ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Appellant/s :

Mr. Manoj Kumar, Advocate For the C.B.S.E :

Mr. V.K. Tripathy, Advocate For the U.G.C :

Mr. Amrendra Nath Verma, SC to UGC ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PARTHA SARTHY ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) Date : 21-09-2023

1. The writ petition was filed against the denial of information sought for with regard to the examination of National Eligibility Test (NET) in the subject of Economics held in the month of July, 2016. There was also an additional prayer for revising the cut-off marks in the NET examination due to the model answers having been declared wrong.

2. The learned Single Judge recorded the submission of the respondents that the details of the candidates qualified in the National Eligibility Test, July-2016, are available on the website and that such information was also given to the petitioner on

Patna High Court L.P.A No.244 of 2019 dt.21-09-2023 2/2 23.01.2018. The petitioner asserted that no such details were available on the website. The learned Single Judge found that even if the submission of the Public Information Officer is incorrect, the remedy of the petitioner is by way of an appeal to get information regarding the National Eligibility Test and the specific subject.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant argued before us that he had a further prayer for revision of cut-off marks and hence the dismissal of the writ petition was not proper. The NET was conducted in July, 2016 and we are in the year 2023. Hence, there is absolutely no purpose in considering the said prayer as of now which also has become infructuous. We also have to notice that none of the persons who appeared in the NET and qualified were impleaded even in a representative capacity.

4. For all the above reasons, we find no reason to entertain the appeal and the appeal stands dismissed. (K. Vinod Chandran, CJ) (Partha Sarthy, J) Shiv/Bibhash AFR/NAFR CAV DATE N/A Uploading Date 22.09.2023.

Transmission Date N/A