Micky v. The State Of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.19328 of 2019 ====================================================== Micky Daughter of Basant Pandey Resident of Village- Sonebarsa, P.S.- Sonebarsa, District- Muzaffarpur.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The State of Bihar through the Director, Higher Education, Education Department, Govt. of Bihar, Patna.

2.

The Vice-Chancellor, B.R. Ambedkar Bihar University, Muzaffarpur. 3.

The Registrar, B.R. Ambedkar Bihar University, Muzaffarpur. 4.

The Examination Controller, B.R. Ambedkar Bihar University, Muzaffarpur. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Mukund Mohan Jha For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Jitendra Kumar Roy 1 ( SC-13 ) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR UPADHYAY ORAL ORDER 18-09-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the counsel appearing on behalf of the State.

The present writ application is a telling tale of the apathy of the University towards the problem of students. The students who have to concentrate on study have to approach the law Court for redressal of their grievance which is supposed to be addressed by the University in ordinary course of business. Petitioner appeared at the examination and after passing the examination, petitioner is told that the regulation has been changed and therefore, petitioner was wrongly allowed to appear at the examination and the benefit of passing the examination has been denied to the petitioner. Petitioner has approached this Court for a direction to

Patna High Court CWJC No.19328 of 2019(2) dt.18-09-2019 2/2 the respondents to add the marks of 1st Semester and publish the final result of Post Graduate in Electronic Science. Since the respondents with open eye allowed the petitioner to appear at the examination and after clearing the final exam they have become wise and now usual clerical mind of inventing fault to deny the final mark sheet and final publication of result was followed by the University. The present case is the result of default of the respondents and denial of the result and mark sheet in this case is gross injustice. The issue as to allowing the students with open eye contrary to regulation was considered by the Apex Court in the case of Krukshetra University AIR 1976 Page 376.

In view of the principles discussed in the case of Krukshetra University, the writ application is allowed. The respondents University is directed to ensure publication of final result of the petitioner and provide final mark sheet of the petitioner at the earliest preferably within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. With the aforesaid, the present writ application is allowed and disposed of.

(Anil Kumar Upadhyay, J) mdrashid/- U