← Library
Patna High CourtCWJC/19465/2016dismissed

Kumari Diksha And ANR v. Bihar School Examination Board Senior Secondary And ORS

2017-05-10Mr. Justice Chakradhari Sharan Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.19465 of 2016 =========================================

1. Kumari Diksha, Daughter of Sudhir Kumar Srivastava, Anand Vihar Colony, Haripur Road, Aghoriya Chowk, Muzaffarpur.

2. Pankaj Kumar, Son of Pramod Sah, Village Fatahpur Pakri, P.O.- Piroe, P.S.- Mahua, District- Vaishali. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. Bihar School Examination Board (Senior Secondary), Buddha Marg, Patna through its Secretary.

2. The Chairman, Bihar School Examination Board (Senior Secondary), Buddha Marg, Patna.

3. The Secretary, Bihar School Examination Board (Senior Secondary), Buddha Marg, Patna.

4. The Examination Controller, (Senior Secondary), Bihar School Examination Board (Senior Secondary), Buddha Marg, Patna. .... .... Respondent/s ========================================= Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sunil Kumar Singh, Adv. For the BSEB : Mr. Manish Kumar, Adv. =========================================

CORAM:

HONOURABLE MR.

JUSTICE CHAKRADHARI SHARAN SINGH ORAL JUDGMENT & ORDER Date: 10-05-2017 This application, under Article of the Constitution of India, has been filed seeking quashing of Advertisement No. 47 of 2016, published under the signature of the Examination Controller (Senior Secondary), Bihar

Patna High Court CWJC No.19465 of 2016 dt.10-05-2017 2/2 School Examination Board, Patna (respondent No. 4) to the extent of cancellation of I.Com. results of such candidates, who appeared from Vishun Roy College, Kiratpur Rajaram, Bhagwanpur, Vaishali.

2. It appears that similar issue had emerged in case of Ratna Jha Vs. The Bihar School Examination Board & Ors., in C.W.J.C. No. 14759 of 2016, which came to be disposed of by a coordinate Bench of this Court vide judgment and order, dated 28.10.2016.

3. Learned counsel, appearing on behalf of the petitioners, has submitted that in case of Ratna Jha (supra), result of I.A. and I.Sc. was under consideration, whereas, the case of the petitioners is of I.Com.

4.

Submission so made on behalf of the petitioners, in my view, does not make any difference. In view of this Court's decision, in case of Ratna Jha (supra), the reliefs as sought on behalf of the petitioners, cannot be granted.

5. This application is, accordingly, dismissed. (Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J) Praveen-II/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N/A Uploading Date 12/05/2017 Transmission Date