JUDGMENT Accordingly, the Writ Petition is being finally disposed of, after hearing the learned counsel for the parties. Ajay Kumar Diwan, Brij Mohan Yadav and Pradeep Bhat are three petitioners who appeared in the Higher Secondary School Examination conducted by the Board of Secondary Education, M.P. Bhopal. All the three petitioners were allowed to appear in the examination and thereafter the result was also declared and the petitioners were shown as successful candidates at the examination. Subsequently, the result of the petitioners was cancelled and no mark-sheet was issued to them. The Roll Nos. of the petitioner Nos. 1, 2 and 3 were 14507503, 14507527 and 14507617 respectively. The petitioners have approached this Court seeking the relief for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus, commanding the respondents for issuing the mark-sheet to them as well as the T.C. The learned counsel for the respondents has not denied the fact that the petitioners were declared successful in the examination but submitted that their results were cancelled as their attendance was found short. According to him, the attendance must be 75% and there is a power of condonation and such condonation power is exercisable in three phases by three different persons as the Principal of the Institution is allowed to condone the attendance upto 3%, thereafter, the Secretary of the Board of Secondary Education, is allowed to condone 4% and thereafter, the Chairman of the Board of Secondary Education is authorised to condone 3%, total thus comes to 10%. Here, in the present case, it is not the case that the attendance of students was less than 65%. Thus, the attendance was condonable upto 10% and if this condonation is allowed and is added to 65% then all the petitioners come within the limit of requisite percentage of attendance. The only objection of the respondents is that the Principal did not communicate the details and that the different authorities are authorised for the purpose of condonation of the attendance. If the Principal of the Institution was on erring side, then, it cannot be a justification as for the error of the Principal, the students cannot be made to suffer. It is not a case that any explanation was obtained from the concerned Principal or any explanation was called for. If the Principal of the Institution was on erring side, then, it cannot be a justification as for the error of the Principal, the students cannot be made to suffer. It is not a case that any explanation was obtained from the concerned Principal or any explanation was called for. The Divisional Officer of the Board of Secondary Education, Raipur himself wrote on the letter of the Principal, which is filed as Annexure-B to the petition, which to the following effect : ^^eaMy ds Kkiu Øekad i-la- 8178@96 Hkksiky] fnukad 26-12-96 ds vuqlkj iw.kZ l= dh mi% tksM+dj Áfr’kr fudkydj cukosaA ;fn mifLFkfr 65 izfr’kr ls vf/kd gS ,oa ‘ks”k mifLFkfr {kek djus dh vuq’kalk vki djrs gSa rks Áos’k i= fn;k tk ldrk gSA d`i;k i= dk iqu% voyksdu dj rnuqlkj dk;Zokgh djsaA** This letter, thus, authorised the Principal to give admission if the attendance is found upto 65% and for making recommendation for granting condonation in the attendance to the Board. The Principal made the recommendation to the Divisional Officer of the Board by letter dated 3.3.97 which is Annexure-C to the petition. The only submission is that the recommendation was bad as the principal should have condoned the attendance to the extent of only 3% himself, and thereafter, he should have recommended to the authorities for condonation of the rest of the attendance. It is not only a technicality but hyper technicality which leads to the insufficiency of the Board. The Board is an examination conducting body and is expected to be efficient, otherwise, its approach cannot be efficient. Even otherwise petitioners were not given any opportunity before cancelling their result. The equity is in favour of the petitioners. In view of the above, the petition deserves to be allowed and it is accordingly allowed and the order of cancellation of the result of the petitioners, if any, shall stand quashed and the respondent -- Board is directed for supplying the mark-sheet to the petitioners as successful candidates in the examination together with the T.C. if desired by the petitioners. However, I make no order as to costs.