Krishna Kumar And ANR v. The Bihar School Examination Board And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7461 of 2016 ======================================================

1. Krishna Kumar, Son of Late Nageshwar Rai,

2. Baidnath Prasad, Son of Shri Nagendra Prasad Both are resident of Village- Rasalpur, Malmda, Post- Baghari, P.S.- Runnisaidpur, District- Sitamarhi.

.... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The Bihar School Examination Board, Sinha Library Road, Patna through its Secretary.

2. The Chairman, Bihar School Examination Board, Sinha Library Road, Patna.

3. The Secretary, Bihar School Examination Board, Sinha Library Road, Patna.

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

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Vinod Kumar For the Respondent/s : Ms. Namrata Mishra ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH ORAL ORDER 10-04-2017 Heard learned Counsel for the parties concerned.

The petitioners seek a direction to the respondents to publish their results of C.P.Ed., for the sessions 1985-86, in which they had appeared in the year 1994.

Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners has placed heavy reliance on a decision of this Court in the case of Amaresh Kumar Verma and Others v. Bihar School Examination Board and Others, dated 12.11.2008, passed in CWJC No. 12408 of 2008, to submit

Patna High Court CWJC No.7461 of 2016 (3) dt.10-04-2017 2/2 that case of the petitioners is on exactly similar footing. These petitioners were also students of the same institute and admit cards were issued in their favour by the Bihar School Examination Board, on the basis of which they had appeared in the concerned examination.

I am not inclined to entertain this application on the sole ground of delay and laches. The petitioners have filed this application 22 years after they had appeared in the said examination, as claimed by them.

Learned Counsel for the petitioners has submitted that after this Court's order, dated 12.11.2008, when the petitioners learnt, they had been advised to file the present application.

In my view, after so much of delay, this application cannot be entertained. Jurisdiction, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is equitable in nature and equity goes in favour of those who are vigilant. This application is accordingly dismissed on the ground of delay and laches.

(Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J.) Prabhakar Anand/- U √ T X