Jyoti Thakur vs State Of H.P. & Others
2021 Latest Caselaw 953 HP

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

CWP No. 534 of 2021.

.

Reserved on : 22 nd January, 2021.

Date of Decision : 4 th February, 2021.

    Jyoti Thakur                                                        ...Petitioner





                                      Versus

    State of H.P. & Others                                            ...Respondents

    Coram:

The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Anoop Chitkara, Vacation Judge.

Whether approved for reporting?1 No.

For the petitioner r : Mr. Ashwani Kaundal, Advocate.

For the respondents : Mr. Vikas Rathore, Addl. AG. With Mr. Gaurav Sharma, Dy. A.G. for respondent No.1 & 4.

Mr. V.B. Verma, Advocate for respondent

No.2.

                                      Mr. Surender Verma,                   Advocate         for
                                      respondent No.5.

COURT PROCEEDINGS CONVENED THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE

Anoop Chitkara, Vacation Judge.

The petitioner, who studied in the institution of third

respondent and passed her 10+2, has come up before this Court

on the ground that the respondents are not considering her 10+2

certificate as valid because the affiliation of the institute has

been withdrawn by the second respondent at the time when the

petitioner had passed the examination.

Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

2. Mr. V.B. Verma, learned counsel representing the

respondent-Board, submits that he has received instructions that

.

the similarly placed persons were permitted by this Court in CWP

No.849 of 2019, titled Priyanka Devi versus State of H.P. &

Others and other decision following this judgment, and he has

no objection in case the similar relief is given to the petitioner

herein, on the ground of parity.

3. I have perused the judgment passed in Priyanka

Devi's case supra and find no reason to take a different view as

taken by the Coordinate Bench of this Court.

4. Given above, the writ petition is disposed of with a

direction to the respondents to consider the 10+2 certificate of

the petitioner, Annexure P-2, issued by the third respondent, as

valid only for the purpose to pursue her further studies based

upon the said certificate. It is made clear that the observations

made are only with respect to seeking further higher studies and

not for other purposes. Pending application(s), if any, are closed.

(Anoop Chitkara), Vacation Judge.

February 04, 2020 (ps)