Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Sri Jagannath Dutta vs Bhagwati Balika Vidyalaya & Ors on 12 July, 2022
12.07.2022
Sl.No. 2
Ct.No.3
Amalranjan
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
APPELLATE SIDE
FMAT 668 of 2019
Sri Jagannath Dutta
VS
Bhagwati Balika Vidyalaya & Ors.
Mr. Jagannath Dutta
...appellant (in person)
Ms. Koyeli Bhattacharyya
...for the respondent/school
We have heard the appellant appearing
in-person and also Mrs. Koyeli Bhattacharyya,
learned counsel appearing for the School.
The appellant is the father of Dalia Dutta, a
former student of Bhagwati Balika Vidyalaya.
The appellant instituted a suit in the learned
City Civil Court at Calcutta, Title Suit No. 357 of
2013 claiming damages of Rs. 5 lakhs against
Bhagwati Balika Vidyalaya of 1, Bankim
Chatterjee Street, Kolkata-700073.
The cause of action of the appellant/plaintiff
in the suit in short is that the school wrongfully
and illegally prevented Dalia Dutta from sitting
in the Madhyamik examination of 2011. For this
reason, the student had to migrate elsewhere
and ultimately after a passage of two years
cleared the examination in 2013 privately, thus,
wasting two years.
The learned court below by a judgment and
decree dated 24th April, 2018 dismissed the suit.
Hence, this appeal.
On examination of the facts, it appears that
prior to taking admission in Bhagwati Balika
Vidyalaya, the student studied in Mitra Balika
Vidyalaya. In 2010 she was unable to clear
Class IX of that school. In that year itself she
sought admission in Bhagwati Balika Vidyalaya
in Class X, so that she could appear in the
school final examination in 2011.
The school ruled that according to
Regulation 17 of the West Bengal Board of
Secondary Education a student had to undergo
at least two years' study in a secondary school
with 70% attendance in Classes IX and X to be
eligible to be sent up for the Board examination.
If attendance was less than 50% a student could
not be allowed to sit for the board examination.
If it were between 50 and 70 percent, her case
could be considered.
Not having cleared even Class IX the
appellant's daughter Dalia Dutta was instructed
by the school to clear Class IX from elsewhere or
from that school. Only then could she apply for
admission into Class X.
However, it appears that for whatever
reason for a short period of 28 days she had
been admitted into Class X of Bhagwati Balika
Vidyalaya. Soon thereafter on discovery of this
mistakes, she was reverted back to Class IX after
28 days. She did not complete Class IX in that
school and left it.
The whole case of the appellant is founded
on the fact that since the school had admitted
Dalia Dutta in Class X they were bound to send
her up for the Board Examination in 2011. Not
having done so, they have wasted two years of
her career and bound to pay damages.
No right can be claimed against law. No
estoppel operates against law. Regulation 17 of
the Board makes it clear as aforesaid that an
aspirant for the said secondary examination
should spend two years in Class IX and X and
clear it with 70% attendance or at least
attendance between 50 to 70 percent, after
condonation of the shortfall.
Admittedly, the appellant did not have any
certificate of having completed Class IX. For this
reason she was not allowed to attend Class X or
proceed to appear in the Board Examination.
We do not find any infirmity in this decision.
Nevertheless, the respondent school was not
justified in misleading Dalia Dutta and admitting
her into Class X even for a short period. The
respondent school Bhagwati Balika Vidyalaya is,
thus, liable to return to the appellant all fees and
charges taken from her for studying in Class X
together with simple interest thereon @ 6% per
annum from 2010 which we assess at Rs.
5,000/- to be paid to the appellant by the
respondent school by 4th August, 2022.
The impugned judgment and decree is
modified to the above extent.
The appeal is, thus, disposed of.
( Subhendu Samanta,J. ) ( I. P. Mukerji,J. )
