A college sought a writ of mandamus to be included in the list of examination centres for UP Board Exams 2020. The court dismissed the petition because the college had no statutory right to the centre and filed objections with a 21-day delay, citing authority on denial of such petitions.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 54
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 611 of 2020
Petitioner :- C/M Gyan Bharti Inter Collage Respondent :- State Of U P And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Kaushal Kishor Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Rajiv Joshi,J.
Heard Shri Kaushal Kishore Chaturvedi, counsel for the petitioner and Shri R.P. Tiwari, learned Standing Counsel for the State.
By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for issuance of a direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to add the petitioner institution in the final list of examination centres published on 30.11.2019 for conducting U.P. Board of High School and Intermediate examination 2020.
It reflects from the record that Government Order dated 16.10.2019 has been issued by the State Government in respect of allotment of Centres for conducting High School and Intermediate Examinations 2020. A detailed procedure has been prescribed in the said Government Order and as per Clause (Gha) thereof, the Parishad shall publish list of the examination Centres for conducting the High School and Intermediate examination by 30.11.2019. Clause 13 of the said Government Order further provides that the aggrieved colleges may file their objection within five days from the date of publication of the final list of allotted centres.
Admittedly, in the present case, the list of examination centres was published on 30.11.2019 and the objection/representation has been made by the petitioner's Institution on 26.12.2019i.e. with delay of 21 days. Copy of the said representation has been appended as Annexure No.7 to the Writ Petition.
Learned Standing Counsel submits that the petitioner has no legal right to be declared as Examination Centre of the Board as he failed to file his objection within the time prescribed under the Government Order dated 16.10.2019 and in view thereof, no direction can be issued to the concerned respondents as prayed for. Learned Standing Counsel has further placed reliance on Judgment of the learned Single Judge of this Court in Misc. Single No.35384 of 2019, C/M S. Ram Shankar A.P.G. Inter College Thru Its Manager & Another Vs. State of U.P. Thru Addl. Chief Secy/Prin Secy Sec. Edu & Other, in which this Court took the view that the Petitioner's College does not have any vested right to be declared as an examination centre and the petition in this regard is not maintainable. The Judgment dated 18.12.2019 passed in Misc. Single No.35384 of 2019 for ready reference is quoted herein under:
"Petitioner Committee of Management, S. Ram Shankar A.P.G. Inter College, Lebuduwa Kodiya Bazar, distt. Gonda, has approached this Court praying that its College should be fixed an examination centre of Board of High School and Intermediate Examination, 2020. It
has also prayed the final list of examination centre of district Gonda for the U.P. Board of High School and Intermediate Examination, 2020 published by the opposite party, U.P. High School and Intermediate Education Board, Prayagraj, to be quashed to the extent it excludes the name of petitioner Institution.
It was specifically put to learned counsel for petitioner as to under which law, the petitioner College has any legal right to be declared as examination centre of the Board, he could not reply to the same. It is always the discretion of the Board to allocate a College the examination centre of the Boarde after looking into large number of aspects while fixing examination centres. The Board after looking into the relevant aspects have already declared the list of examination centres. Since the petitioner College does not have any vested right to be declared as an examination centre, the petition is not maintainable in writ jurisdiction. Learned counsel for petitioner has prayed that he may be permitted to make representation to the appropriate authorities. I am not inclined to accept such request, as there was large scale of mass copying being done in the State for many many years. With great difficulty, the same has come in control of the authorities. Therefore, any indulgence given at this stage, may seriously jeopardize the efforts of the authorities. Thus, the said request is refused. With the aforesaid, the petition is dismissed."
It is well settled that under Article 226 of the Constitution, the power of the High Court to issue appropriate writ is discretionary and the relief cannot be claimed as of right. One of the grounds for refusing the relief under Article 226 of the Constitution is that petitioner is guilty of delay and laches. In the present case, as indicated above, the petitioner himself has filed his objection/representation beyond the prescribed time limit.
In S. Ram Shnakar A.P.G. Inter College (supra), the Court has rightly taken the view that the petitioner's Institution has no legally enforceable right to be declared as one of the examination centres, as the primary purpose of a writ of mandamus is to protect a statutory right and to enforce the corresponding imperative duty created or imposed by law.
In view of what has been indicated above, since the petitioner does not have any legal right, this Writ Petition lacks merit and is, accordingly, dismissed.
Order Date :- 9.1.2020 SNT/
3 issues framed by the court
Whether a petitioner institution has a legally enforceable right to be declared an examination centre for UP Board Examinations.
Whether a writ of mandamus lies to compel inclusion of a petitioner in a publication of examination centres when no statutory right is established.
Whether delay in filing objections vitiates the maintainability of a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Misc. Single No.35384 of 2019, C/M S. Ram Shankar A.P.G. Inter College Thru Its Manager & Another Vs. State of U.P. Thru Addl. Chief Secy/Prin Secy Sec. Edu & ORelied on¶9
C/M Gyan Bharti Inter Collage
State Of U P
3 Others
Rajiv Joshi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
