Md. Taslim Arif v. Chairman, Ugc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8538 of 2019 ====================================================== Md. Taslim Arif Son of Md. Badruddin, resident of Mahraji Pokhar, Purabghat, P.O.- Ramna, District- Muzaffarpur (Bihar). ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

Chairman, UGC NET Bureau, New Delhi- 110021.

2.

The Head, UGC NET Bureau, University of Delhi, South Campus BE NITO JUAREZ Marg, New Delhi- 110021.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Shabbir Ahmad For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Amarendra Nath Verma ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 24-04-2019 The present writ petition has been filed for directing the respondents to add 02 marks against the wrong question no.29 in paper-1 series W in UGC NET Examination conducted in the month of June, 2014.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted by referring to Annexure-3 to the writ petition that against question No. 29, star has been made whereas the petitioner was liable to be given 2 marks since the question was wrong, as has been given to all other students, hence, appropriate direction be given to the respondent-authorities.

3. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondentUGC has raised a preliminary objection with regard to maintainability of the present writ petition on account of the same

Patna High Court CWJC No.8538 of 2019 dt.24-04-2019 2/3 having been filed after huge delay of almost five years. Secondly, the learned counsel for the UGC has submitted by referring to Annexure-10 to the writ petition i.e. the letter of the UGC dated 26.05.2016 that the petitioner was clearly intimated that only those candidates have been granted marks for question no. 29 who had attempted the said question no. 29 by way of attempting 1-50 questions, however, as far as the petitioner is concerned, he has not been given any marks since he had attempted 51 other questions, without attempting question no. 29. It has also been alleged that as far as question no. 22 is concerned, the petitioner has tried to eraze one of the answers, hence, according to the rules, no marks has been given to the said answer.

4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and considered the matter at length. It is apparent that the writ petition is barred by the principles of delay and laches inasmuch as even if the petitioner was supplied with the letter of the UGC dated 26.5.2016 explaining the actual position prevailing with regard to the case of the petitioner, the petitioner did not approach this Court and has now, at this belated stage, approached this Court in the year 2019. Even on merits, the explanation furnished by the respondent UGC is plausable and the learned counsel for the petitioner has not been able to rebut the same, hence, this Court

Patna High Court CWJC No.8538 of 2019 dt.24-04-2019 3/3 does not find any reason to interfere in the matter, accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.

(Mohit Kumar Shah, J) Tiwary/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N/A Uploading Date 03.05.2019 Transmission Date N/A