ORDER : RAJESH SHANKAR, J. Civil Review No.02 of 2025: 1. The present civil review has been filed on behalf of Dr. Suman Kumar Burnwal, Examination Controller, Binod Bihari Mahto Koylanchal University, Dhanbad (hereinafter to be referred as “ BBM K University” ) praying inter alia to review the order dated 18 th February, 2022 passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No.640 of 2022. 2. Learned counsel for the review-petitioner submits that due to change in the administrative set up of BBMK, University, Dhanbad, some delay occurred in filing the present review petition seeking review of the order dated 18 th February, 2022 passed in W.P.(C) No.640 of 2022. It is further submitted that the respondent no.1-Bipin Kumar Paul had filed the aforesaid writ petition for issuance of direction upon the BBMK, University, Dhanbad to allow him to fill-up the on- line examination form and to appear in 4 th Semester Examination of B.Ed. Course for the Session 2019-21 as he had failed to log-in the official website/portal of the said University, despite his best efforts. 3. It is further submitted that the said writ petition was taken up on 17 th February, 2022 and on the said date, the counsel for the University was directed to seek instruction from the concerned authority of the University on the said issue. Since, 2 the said case was heard through Video Conferencing, during COVID-19 pandemic period, the counsel for the University could not obtain proper instruction and due to the said reason, it was wrongly submitted before the Court on 18 th February, 2022 that the petitioner could not fill-up the examination form of the said course due to technical snag in the website/portal of the University. The last date for filling up the examination form was already over on 31 st January, 2022. Under the said circumstance, keeping in view that the respondent no.1- Bipin Kumar Paul could not fill-up the examination form due to technical snag in the official website/portal of the BBMK, University, Dhanbad, this Court vide order dated 18 th February, 2022 directed the Examination Controller of the said University to permit him to fill-up the examination form through off-line mode by 19 th February, 2022 so as to enable him to appear in the said examination which was to commence from 21 st February, 2022. 4. 4. Learned counsel for the review-petitioner also submits that in fact, the actual position was that the respondent no.1-Bipin Kumar Paul was enrolled in B.Ed. Course for the Session 2017-19 in R.S. Teachers Training College, Katras having University Registration No.17192282 and Roll No.181341719035. The said fact would be evident from the B.Ed. 3 rd Semester mark-sheet (Annexure-A) issued to him declaring ‘fail’ in the said examination. The respondent no.1 had also wrongly mentioned in the writ petition that he was the student of B.Ed. course for the Session 2019-21, rather he was the student of B.Ed. course for the Session 2017-19 and was required to complete the said course within three years as per Regulation 9 of the National Council for Teacher Education (Recognition Norms and Procedure) Regulations, 2014 (hereinafter to be referred as “the Regulations, 2014”). Appendix 4 to Regulation 9 of the Regulations, 2014 contains the norms and standards for Bachelor of Education Programme leading to Bachelor of Education (B.Ed.) degree. Clause 2.1 of the same provides that the B.Ed. course shall be of a duration of two academic years which can be completed in a maximum period of three years from the date of admission to the programme. 5. It is further submitted that the respondent no.1 appeared in the 3 rd Semester examination conducted by the BBMK University, Dhanbad in the month of February, 2019 and was declared ‘fail’. He again appeared in the said examination held in the month of September, 2020, however, that time also, he was declared ‘fail’. Hence, as per the Regulations, 2014, he could not have been allowed to complete the B.Ed. course beyond a period of three years. Since the respondent no.1 was enrolled in the said course for the Session 2017-19 and the maximum period of three years prescribed for completion of B.Ed. course from the date of admission to the course had already expired in the year 2020, he could not have been allowed to fill-up the examination form to appear in 4 th Semester Examination of B.Ed. course for the Session 2019-21. 6. course from the date of admission to the course had already expired in the year 2020, he could not have been allowed to fill-up the examination form to appear in 4 th Semester Examination of B.Ed. course for the Session 2019-21. 6. It is, thus, submitted by the learned counsel for the review-petitioner that the application form of the respondent no.1 was not accepted due to the reason that the Session for which he was enrolled i.e., 2017-19 was already over in the year 2020 in view of the provision prescribed in Clause 2.1 of Appendix-4 to Regulation 9 of the Regulations, 2014. In fact, there was no technical snag in the website/portal of the University and the said submission was wrongly made by the counsel for the writ-petitioner as well as the BBMK University, Dhanbad which led to passing of the order dated 18 th February, 2022. 7. Learned counsel for the respondent no.1 submits that in spite of the fact that the respondent no.1 was enrolled in B.Ed. Course for the Session 2017-19, he was permitted to appear in B.Ed. 3 rd Semester examination with the Session 2019-21 held on 3 rd November, 2021 and had also cleared the said examination. The Admit Card and mark-sheet of the 3 rd Semester examination for the Session 2019-21 would suggest that the respondent no.1 had appeared in the said examination after three years period prescribed for clearing the examination and, as such, the Regulations, 2014 cannot be so stringently applied in the case of the respondent no.1. 8. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the order dated 18 th February, 2022 passed in W.P.(C) No.640 of 2022, it appears that the said writ petition was disposed of primarily keeping in view the submission of the learned counsel for the BBMK University, Dhanbad that the writ-petitioner could not fill-up the examination form for the said course due to technical snag in the website/portal of the University. 9. It was not pointed out to the Court that the respondent no.1 was a student of B.Ed. course for the Session 2017-19 and three years period as per the Regulations, 2014 was already over in the year 2020. Despite the fact that the respondent no.1 subsequently cleared the B.Ed. 9. It was not pointed out to the Court that the respondent no.1 was a student of B.Ed. course for the Session 2017-19 and three years period as per the Regulations, 2014 was already over in the year 2020. Despite the fact that the respondent no.1 subsequently cleared the B.Ed. 3 rd Semester Examination with the Session 2019-21 held on 3 rd November, 2021, his on-line examination form of B.Ed. 4 th Semester was not accepted by the on-line system as the three years period was already over by then. 10. The issue as to whether as per the provision of Clause 2.1 of Appendix-4 to Regulation 9 of the Regulations 2014, the respondent no.1 could have been permitted to continue with the B.Ed. Course even after lapse of three years was neither argued by the learned counsel for the parties nor was decided by the Court while disposing of the said writ petition vide order dated 18 th February, 2022. 11. Under the said circumstance, the direction as contained in the last/operative paragraph of the order dated 18 th February, 2022 passed in W.P.(C) No.640 of 2022 is required to be reviewed and the same is, hereby, recalled. 12. The present civil review petition filed on behalf of the BBMK University, Dhanbad is, accordingly, allowed. Contempt Case (Civil) No.350 of 2022 13. Since the Civil Review No.02 of 2025 preferred by BBMK University, Dhanbad has been allowed recalling the operative paragraph of the order dated 18 th February, 2022 passed in W.P.(C) No.640 of 2022, no case of contempt is made out against the Opposite Parties. 14. The contempt petition is, accordingly, dismissed. 15. The issue as to whether the petitioner can be permitted to complete the B.Ed. course even beyond a period of three years from the date of taking admission in the said course is left open to be decided if the petitioner files a fresh writ petition raising the said issue, if so advised.