Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2000 DIGILAW 1278 (PAT)

Sarshwati Kumari v. State Of Bihar

2000-11-30

SHIVA KIRTI SINGH

body2000
Judgment 1. Heard the parties. 2. The prayer made in these writ application is to quash various orders passed by Bihar School Examination Board by which the results of private can didates of various schools in the district of Rohtas have been cancelled on the ground that as per an inquiry by Officers practice may benefit undeserving candidates whereas those who may have actually passed the sent up examination may be deprived of their result only because they may not indulge in such practice. It has further been submitted that there is no requirement existing from before that the schools in question must preserve the copies of sent up test/preliminary test for any period of time for the purpose of enquiry etc. of Education Department submitted through the District Magistrate, Rohtas in most of the schools copies of sentup test were not found available and hence it was doubtful whether the private candidates from such schools had actually taken the sent-up test or not. 3. It is relevant to state at the very out-set that the results of private students of several schools had been earlier withheld or cancelled on the ground of non-production of certificate of residence. With regard to such requirement this Hon ble Court has already held in several judgments some of which have been annexed Annexures 11 and 12 to this writ applicaton that requirement of such certificate may be applied from the next year and it will not be taken as a ground for withholding or cancelling the result of private candidates who have already taken the matriculation examination. 4. So far as the new ground for withholding/cancelling examination mentioned in this order is concerned it appears from one of the orders of this court contained in Annexure-B to the counter affidavit of the State that to meet this ground this court gave liberty to the candidates/petitioners to approach their respective schools and if they so approached their respective schools then the school authorities were directed to forward their respective evidence/answer books of preliminary test/sent up test to the Board within 15 days, failing which it will be presumed that no such answer book exists in the school. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that on the basis of aforesaid observation/liberty some candidates have approached with answer books and their resultshave been cleared but this practice may encourage a corrupt practice of preparing or creating such answer books later and such wrong 5. Learned counsel appearing for Bihar School Examination Board has very fairly submitted that there is no existing rule or circular requiring the schools to preserve the copies for any period of time. However he has submitted that if the petitioners or similar persons approach the Examination Board with representation to the effect that the marks register of their concerned school have been authenticated by District Education Officer or similar other concerned Officers then after verifying this fact from the concerned schools the Examination Board wilt have no objection to publication of the result of the concerned students. In view of this fair stand this writ application is disposed of with a direction that the petitioners shall approach their respective schools as well as the Examination Board through representation along with a copy of this order and on receipt of such representation the concerned authorities will verify the claim of the petitioners on the basis of marks register of the schools and if from such registers the Examination Board is satisfied that the candidates have taken the sent up test then the results of such candidates will be published forthwith. This exercise must be completed within a week from the date of filing of such representation and attempt should be made to clear the result even earlier if the school in question produced the certified marks register before the School Examination Board along with their representation. It is made clear again that this order should be applied in general to all similarly situated candidates or institution who have not approached this court. 6. These writ applications are accordingly disposed of.