Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2002 DIGILAW 565 (PAT)

Ashraf Ali v. Bhupendra Narayan Mandal University

2002-05-02

RAVI S.DHAVAN, SHASHANK KR.SINGH

body2002
Judgment 1. The present Letters Patent Appeal has been preferred against the order of the learned writ court dated 14.3.2002 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 613 of 2002, by which the learned writ court had rejected the appellants contention for a direction to the respondent B.N. Mandal University to publish the result of B.Sc. Part-Ill (Hons.) examination, 1994 held in December, 1994 on the ground that no valid Admit card had been issued to the appellant and he was invoking the jurisdiction of this court about 7 years after the cause of action accrued. 2. The contention of the appellant is that the appellant, who was a student of Saharsa College for the Session 1991-94, had passed his part I and Part II examinations held in the years, 1992 and 1993. It is further contended that part III examination was to be held between 15.12.1994 and 23.12.1994. The cause of the appellant is that though he had submitted his examination forms and fees but no Admit card was issued to him by the authorities of the University. However, he was permitted to appear in the said examination by the Centre Superintendent. According to the learned counsel, as the appellant had already appeared in the said examination, as such, his result, which is pending before the University, should be published and he be declared to have cleared the said examination. 3. From the order of the learned writ court it transpires that the stand of the University before the writ court by filing a supplementary counter-affidavit was that in the first batch the forms and fees of 484 students of Saharsa College including 255 of the Science students were sent by the College to the University on 17.11.1994. Another set of forms and fees on behalf of 54 students were also sent later on on 21.12.94, which included 20 science students. Yet anohter set of forms and fees were sent on behalf of three science students. According to the University the Admit cards were duly issued to all 278 students, who were to appear in B.Sc. part III examination and filled up their forms and fees. As the appellants fees and forms were never received, as such, no Admit card was issued to him and in view of the aforesaid fact he could not have been allowed to appear in the aforesaid examination. 4. part III examination and filled up their forms and fees. As the appellants fees and forms were never received, as such, no Admit card was issued to him and in view of the aforesaid fact he could not have been allowed to appear in the aforesaid examination. 4. The learned writ court in view of the aforesaid stand of the respondent University and in view of the fact that the jurisdiction of this court was being invoked after nearly 7 years did not grant any indulgence in favour of the writ petitioner and rightly so. 5. We do not find any error in the order of the learned writ court requiring interference at this stage. 6. The present Letters Patent Appeal is dismissed being devoid of merit.