Kundan Kumar v. The State Of Bihar And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12561 of 2015 =========================================================== Kundan Kumar Son of Sri Jai Prakash Singh Resident of village- Berhna Shanti Tola, P.S.- Barh, District- Patna .... .... Petitioner

Versus

1. The State of Bihar through Principal Secretary, Education Department, Government of Bihar, Patna

2. The Director, Research and Training, Education Department, Government of Bihar, Patna

3. The District Education Officer, Patna

4. The District Programme Officer (Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan), Patna

5. The Principal, District Institute of Education and Training, Bikram, Patna .... .... Respondents =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner :

Mr. Pramod Kumar, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Santosh Chandra Bhaskar, AC to GP-11 =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 15-11-2016 No student has a right to demand a relief of any kind against any institution, contrary to their Regulation. In the present case petitioner did not attend classes for a long long period of time in the second year of his course of B.Ed. The purported reason for such prolonged absence is said to be illness.

The supporting material with regard to such illness and that too such a prolonged illness running into months is not borne out from the records and the prescription, as such. Obviously it is a begotten kind of prescription contained in Annexure-7 to cover up the absence.

Earlier also the petitioner had approached the High

Patna High Court CWJC No.12561 of 2015 dt.15-11-2016 2/2 Court. The Court gave direction upon the respondents to consider his request strictly in accordance with the regulations governing such issues.

It is evident that a minimum of 85% of attendance is mandatory for every student who has taken admission in such course. Apparently, the petitioner does not appear to be a serious kind of student. He simply intends to somehow acquire a degree so that he can join the queue for appointment. Such non-serious student cannot be given leeway beyond the ambit of the Regulation. Writ has no merit. It is dismissed.

(Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J) Pawan/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N/A Uploading Date 16.11.2016 Transmission Date N/A