Monday, 18, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Anil Kumar vs The State Of Bihar
2021 Latest Caselaw 5418 Patna

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 5418 Patna
Judgement Date : 23 November, 2021

Patna High Court
Anil Kumar vs The State Of Bihar on 23 November, 2021
         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                    Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6640 of 2021
     ======================================================

Anil Kumar Son of Shri Rajendra Thakur Resident of Village-Inarwa, Post- Ghailadh, Police Station-Madhepura, (Ghailadh O.P.), District- Madhepura.

... ... Petitioner/s Versus

1. The State of Bihar Bihar.

2. The Vice Chancellor B.N. Mandal University, Madhepura.

3. The Examination Controller B.N. Mandal University, Madhepura.

4. The Principal Adarsh College, Ghailarh Jiwachpur, Madhepura.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Surya Narayan Yadav For the Respondent/s : Mr.Lalit Kishore (Ag) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 23-11-2021

In the instant petition, petitioner has prayed for

following relief/reliefs:

"i. For issuance of appropriate writ/writs, order/orders, direction/directions commanding the respondents to publish the result of B.Sc Physics Honours Examination without adding the all subjects Marks obtain by the petitioner in B.Sc part-1 and part-2. ii. For direction/direction to the respondents to Publish the result which is pending after adding the marks in B.Sc part - 3 Examination which is obtain by the petitioner in B.Sc part - 1 and part -2 Examination. iii. For any other relief/reliefs to which the petitioner is entitled under the law for ends of justice."

The petitioner was required to complete the course of

B.Sc. within stipulated period. He has failed to clear the

examination within the stipulated period in terms of the regulation. Patna High Court CWJC No.6640 of 2021 dt.23-11-2021

However, petitioner's name was forwarded by the college

authorities and it was accepted by the University for writing

examination beyond the stipulated time under the regulation.

Before publication of the result, the university have noticed that

permission granted to the petitioner to write the examination was

beyond the stipulated period and it is not permissible, thus, the

university have not announced the petitioner's examination result.

In the light of the aforesaid facts one has to draw

inference that there is lapses on the part of the College and

University in permitting the petitioner to participate in the process

of examination and it is contrary to the regulation. At the same

time for no fault of the petitioner, the petitioner's examination

result cannot be withheld. In fact, College and the University

should have rejected the petitioner's application for examination at

threshold as and when he submitted application through College

with reference to the regulation.

Learned counsel for the respondent University

vehemently contended that in identical matter, this Court rejected

the grievance of the candidate on the score that petitioner therein

has failed to complete the course within the stipulated period under

the regulation.

Patna High Court CWJC No.6640 of 2021 dt.23-11-2021

Perusal of the judgement cited, it is to be noted that

default on the part of the College and University Authority has not

been appreciated and taken note of. That apart education

institutions should encourage in acquiring education qualification

by students in terms of Part IV of the Constitution in particularly

Article 41 and 46 relate to Education. For no fault of the petitioner,

he was permitted to participate in the process of examination due

to default on the part of College and the University, therefore, the

cited decision do not assist the petitioner merely the participation

of the petitioner therein is beyond the period.

In the light of these facts and circumstances the

petitioner has made out a case. Accordingly, the concerned

respondent University is hereby directed to pronounce the result of

the petitioner within a period of two months from the date of

receipt of this order.

(P. B. Bajanthri, J)

GAURAV S./-

AFR/NAFR                NAFR
CAV DATE                NA
Uploading Date          26.11.2021
Transmission Date       NA
 

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : MAIMS

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter