Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2002 DIGILAW 832 (PAT)

Nawal Yadav v. Bihar School Examination Board

2002-08-01

CHANDRAMAULI KR.PRASAD

body2002
Judgment 1. This writ application has been filed for issuance of writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate order of direction commanding the respondents to issue Examination Forms and Registration Forms of the students of Dr. Chandradeo Yadav Smarak High School, Dhanvah-Manpur, Lakhisarai and to accept the same and issue Admit Cards so that the students may appear in the supplementary Secondary School examination conducted by the Bihar School Examination Board. 2. Shorn of unnecessary details, facts giving rise to the present writ application are that the petitioner is the headmaster of Dr. Chandradeo Yadav Smarak High School, Dhanvah-Manpur (hereinafter referred to as the School). The school in question deposited the registration forms and fees of 1006 students on 7.6.2001 through the Principal of State aided High School, Manpur as private students, in the office of the Board. It is the stand of the petitioner that in November, 2001, the test examination of the students who intended to appear in the examination was conducted by the School and after the examination, the school published the result of successful students. After the test, the students were sent up for appearing in the examination and fees and forms were deposited. It is the grievance of the petitioner that respondent-Bihar School Examination Board (hereinafter referred to as the Board), has not accepted the fees and forms and has not issued the Admit Cards for their appearance in the examination. 3. Counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondent-Board and in paragraph-5 thereof, it has been stated that the school in question forwarded the registration forms of 462 regular students and 805 private students. In the opinion of the Board, the number of regular students were abnormal and accordingly, the District Education Officer called the concerned school to produce the relevant documents to establish the genuineness of the students but the school failed to produce the same and as such, registration forms of 1066 students have been cancelled. 4. Mr. Rajendra Prasad Singh, learned Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that the eligibility to appear in the Secondary School Examination of the Board is provided under Chapter IV of the Bihar School Examination Board Regulations, 1964 (for short Regulation). He submits that Clause 3 of Chapter IV of the Regulations, inter alia, provides for eligibility of private candidates for appearing in the Secondary School Examination. He submits that Clause 3 of Chapter IV of the Regulations, inter alia, provides for eligibility of private candidates for appearing in the Secondary School Examination. He submits that Clause (3) (c) of the Regulation requires private candidates to pass a preliminary test examination held at any Government Secondary School or other Secondary School appointed by the Director of Public Instruction for the purpose and the students passing the preliminary test, are eligible to appear in the examination. He refers to paragraph 11 of the writ application and submits that students fulfill the eligibility cariteria and thus entitled to appear in the examination. In support of his submission, Shri Singh has placed reliance on a judgment of this court passed in C.W.J.C. No. 3968 of 2002 (Ram Naresh Prasad Singh V/s. The State of Bihar and others) and analogous cases disposed of on 1.5.2002. 5. Mr. S.D. Yadav, learned counsel, however appearing on behalf of the respondents-Board submits that whether the students have appeared in the test examination is a matter of enquiry and merely on the statements of the petitioner that they have appeared in the test, it cannot be concluded that the students, in fact, appeared in the examination. As regards the judgment of this court in the case of Ram Naresh Prasad Singh (supra), he submits that the aforesaid order has been passed by this court on the concession of the Board that it has no objection to allow the students in the examination as private students. He emphasised that the Board, before permitting the students to appear in the examination, is to be satisfied about their genuineness. 6. Having appreciated the rival submissions, I find substance in the submission of Shri Yadav. True it is that in Para-graph-11 of the writ application, petitioner has stated that the students appeard in the test examination and while answering the aforesaid paragraph, the respondent-Board, in the counter affidavit, has clearly stated that the same is a matter of enquiry. In the absence of any material and in the state of the pleadings, it is difficult for this court to hold that the students of the petitioners school appeared in the test. It is common ground that for appearing in the secondary school examination as private students, holding of the test is sina qua non. Petitioner had not produced relevant documents in support of his statement. It is common ground that for appearing in the secondary school examination as private students, holding of the test is sina qua non. Petitioner had not produced relevant documents in support of his statement. As regards the decision relied on by Shri Singh, same is on concession and does not lay down law which in anyway supports the case of the petitioner. 7. In the facts of the present case, I am of the opinion that the petitioner shall be well advised to approach the Board afresh and place all documents establishing his claim. Needless to state that in case the petitioner produces the required documents in support of his claim, the Board shall consider the same and pass order in accordance with law. 8. It is made clear that I have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the claim of the petitioner in this regard. 9. To put the record straight I must state that Sri Yadav had taken a plea that under the Regulation only those candidates can appear in the supplementary examination who have appeared in Main examination. This question being academic at the present stage, I have not expressed any opinion on the same. 10. Application stands dismissed with the aforesaid observation.