Shubhranshu Naik & Others vs Central Board Of Secondary ... Opposite ...
2025 Latest Caselaw 10058 Ori

Orissa High Court

Shubhranshu Naik & Others vs Central Board Of Secondary ... Opposite ... on 17 November, 2025

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

                              W.P.(C) No.32136 of 2025
              Shubhranshu Naik & Others                .... Petitioners
                                        Mr.Gokulananda Sahu, Advocate
                                        -versus-

              Central    Board   of   Secondary ... Opposite Parties
              Education, New Delhi & Others
                                 Mr.Tarananda Pattanayak, Advocate

                        CORAM:
                        JUSTICE DIXIT KRISHNA SHRIPAD
                                    ORDER

17.11.2025 Order No. 01 The subject matter of this petition, counsel for the

petitioner argues, is substantially similar to the one

treated by this Court in W.P.(C) No.19941 of 2025

between Oum Sai Avatar v. C.B.S.E. & Others & etc. and

decided on 15.09.2025. The operative portion of the order

is as under:-

"In the above circumstances, these petitions are allowed in part. A Writ of Certiorari issues quashing the impugned decisions whereby petitioners are stigmatized as the candidates of "UFM". A Writ of Mandamus issues to the CBSE to hold a fresh inquiry in terms of Bye-Law 36 of the subject Bye-Laws after giving reasonable opportunity of participation to the petitioners. The inquiry should be accomplished and further action, pursuant to its result, be completed within an outer limit of two (2) weeks. All contentions of the parties are kept open...."

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits

that once a relief has been granted to a litigant in a set of

circumstances, others cannot be denied when such others

are also similarly circumstanced. To this, Mr.Pattanayak,

learned counsel for CBSE counters that if petitioners had

come to Court along with others, the question of

similarity would arise and when he has approached the

Court belatedly, the elements of similarity are rubbed off

and therefore, the same cannot be treated, more

particularly in academic matters like this, on par with

each other. There is force in the submission. He also

submits that the petitioners were fence sitter and that

they were awaiting for the judgment of this Court in

other cognate mattes and therefore, such persons cannot

be granted any relief.

3. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and

having perused the petition papers, this Court is broadly

in agreement with the submission made on behalf of the

CBSE that a litigant, who belatedly wakes up from the

slumber and approach this Court, cannot be granted any

relief since granting of such relief would create some

difficulties in the realm of academic. Be that as it may,

suffice it to reserve liberty to the CBSE to decide in its

discretion as to what should happen to the claim of the

petitioners in the light of what has been done to other

similarly circumstanced students. Obviously, therefore,

no positive direction can be issued in favour of the

petitioners, matter being left to the domain of the CBSE.

With the above observation, this petition is

disposed off.

Web copy of order to be acted upon by all

concerned.

(Dixit Krishna Shripad) Judge Basu

Designation: ADDL. DY. REGISTRAR-CUM-ADDL.

Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA : CUTTACK Date: 20-Nov-2025 11:38:58