Judgment Narayan Roy, J. 1. Heard counsel for the parties. 2. The writ petitioners have prayed for issuance of direction upon the respondents to declare their result, which is said to have been cancelled by the Bihar School Examination Board (hereinafter to be referred to as "Board"). 3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the petitioners had appeared in 2004 matriculation examination through T. K. Ghosh Academy, Patna and their fees, forms etc. were accepted by the respondent Board and admit cards were issued but result of the petitioners, however, was withheld and the petitioners came to know from the concerned school that though they have passed the matriculation examination, their results have been withheld. 4. Mr. J.P. Shukla, learned counsel for the respondent Board, submits that the petitioners subsequently were not found to be genuine students and on the basis of the report submitted by the District Education Officer, contained in annexure E to the counter affidavit, results of the petitioners were withheld and subsequently cancelled. 5. However, no explanation has been given in the counter affidavit as to under what circumstances the petitioners were allowed to appear in the examination by issuing admit cards. 6. It appears that in case of private students, who appeared through a recognised school, their matters are examined by the District Education Officer and on the certification made by the District Education Officer, such students are allowed to appear in the matriculation examination. 7. So far as the petitioners of this writ application are concerned it is nowhere stated in the counter affidavit that at the initial stage the District Education Officer had not certified them to be genuine students, rather it appears that they Were treated as genuine students and thus, they were allowed to appear in the matriculation examination. 8. Since the petitioners were allowed to appear in the matriculation examination and they are said to be successful students, it would be presumed that the petitioners had satisfied all requirements for their appearance in the examination as private students. 9. At this stage, in my opinion, the scrutiny made by the respondent Board cannot be given legal sanction and the cause of the petitioners cannot be allowed to be frustrated. 10. 9. At this stage, in my opinion, the scrutiny made by the respondent Board cannot be given legal sanction and the cause of the petitioners cannot be allowed to be frustrated. 10. The measure which could have been adopted by the respondent Board at the initial stage, now should not be allowed to be adopted at the fag end when the petitioners have already passed out the matriculation examination. Nowhere it is stated in the counter affidavit as to under what circumstances the District Education Officer has resiled from his earlier certification. 11. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the respondent Board is directed to publish the result of the petitioners forthwith and issue the computerised marksheet to them. 12. With the direction/observation aforesaid, this application is disposed of. 13. However, it will not be a precedence in future, as this application is being disposed of in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case.