Disposed

Rajeev Kumar Rathi v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC8 Jul 2021WRIC/2312/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner, a private candidate, could not get a pass certificate after appearing in an Intermediate Examination cancelled by the Board. Relying on a prior judgment quelling similar cancellations, petitioner sued. Court granted liberty to file a representation to the relevant respondent for merits determination without expressing opinion now.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to approach second respondent with a fresh representation; second respondent to decide expeditiously within two months.

Rajeev Kumar Rathi Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others — Education and Admissions | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 34

¶2

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 2312 of 2021

¶3

Petitioner :- Rajeev Kumar Rathi Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Hemendra Kumar Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Pankaj Bhatia,J.

¶5

The petitioner claims to have appeared in the Intermediate Examination conducted by the Board of High School & Intermediate, Allahabad in the year 1996, as a private candidate from Adarsh Janta Higher Secondary School, Bhataula Milk, Bulandshahr. The examination centre was at Model Inter College, Ghunghrauli, Bulandshahr. The petitioner was issued a Marks sheet dated 13 June 1996 showing him as having passed the examination in second division. On the basis thereof, the petitioner passed B.A. examination and is now employed as Sahayak Class-III (Bhandaran)-AG-3rd Depo in Food Corporation of India, Regional Office, Dehradoon. In pursuance thereof, the petitioner approached the College to issue pass certificate to him, but the College informed him that the same can not be issued, as the examination of the year 1996 for the centre in question, was cancelled as a whole.

¶6

It is stated that the petitioner came to know that Writ Petition No. 23706 of 1996, Nadeem Ahmad and others Versus Regional Secretary , was filed before this Court by certain candidates of the same centre whose results were also cancelled and the writ aforesaid was allowed by order dated 23 March 2004. It is pointed out that the order passed by the writ Court was affirmed in Special Appeal No. 1183 of 2009, consequent to its dismissal on 22 January 2015. It is urged that on the basis of the said judgment, the Board has issued pass certificate to several candidates. However, the respondents are refusing to apply the said judgment in the case of the petitioner, merely for the reason that the petitioner was not a party thereto. It is submitted that once this Court has held that the cancellation of the result for a particular centre was illegal, the petitioner also becomes entitled to the benefit of the said judgment.

¶7

Learned standing counsel appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 3 submits that the claim of the petitioner can be examined by the second respondent, in case the petitioner approaches him by means of a representation.

¶8

Considering the facts of the case and the submissions made, this

¶9

petition is disposed of by granting liberty to the petitioner to approach the second respondent with a fresh representation along with certified copy of this order. In the event any such representation is made, the second respondent shall consider and decide the same, in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably within a period of next two months.

¶10

It is clarified that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the claim of the petitioner and the same shall be examined by the second respondent, without being influenced by any observation made in this order.

¶11

Order Date :- 8.7.2021 S. Rahman

Rajeev Kumar Rathi v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajeev Kumar Rathi v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Arti Devi and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Smt.Kusum Devi and 6 Others Vs Additional Commissioner and 4 Others

Udayraj Vs State of U.P. and 22 Others

Smt.Nisha and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Ramesh Chandra Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Kashinath Maurya Vs State of U P and 4 Others