Manav Bharti University and Another Vs Asha Devi and Others

Manav Bharti University & Anr. Vs. Ms. Asha Devi & Ors.

CMP No.5583 of 2025 in Review Petition No.8 of 2025

12.09.2025 Present: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General, Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar & Mr. B.C. Verma, Additional Advocates General with Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General, for the petitioners.

¶4

Ms. Kanta Thakur, Advocate, for review petitioners/non-applicants.

¶5

Mr.Anirudh Sharma, Advocate, for respondent No.1.

¶6

Mr. Vishwajeet Singh, Advocate, for respondent No.3.

¶7

By way of instant application, prayer has been made on behalf of the Superintendent of Police, Solan-cumChairman Document Verification Committee, Manav Bharti University, District Solan, Himachal Pradesh, for modification and recalling of order dated 11.03.2025 passed in Review Petition No.8/2025 in CWP No.10943 of 2023, inasmuch as direction was issued to the Chairman to the Committee concerned to carry out correction in the record/green sheet and thereafter, supply the degree/mark sheet of law to the petitioner.

¶8

It has been averred in the application that since original record/green sheet already stands deposited with learned JMFC Court No.II, Solan, District Solan, Himachal Pradesh and learned Special Judge, Shimla, District Shimla, Himachal Pradesh, it may not be possible for the SP Solan-cum-

¶9

Chairman of the Committee to do the needful, in terms of order, sought to be recalled.

¶10

Having taken note of afore stand put-forth by the Chairman of the Committee i.e. SP Solan, this Court passed order dated 25.07.2025, which reads as under:-

¶11

“In the application at hand, Superintendent of Police, while praying for modification of order dated 11.03.2025 passed in Review Petition No. 8 of 2025, inasmuch as direction was issued to him to correct the green sheet, has averred in the application that he does not have the authority to make any correction in the green sheet and in past, no such correction has been made. However, non-applicant/respondent No. 1, by way of filing reply, has categorically refuted the afore claim of Superintendent of Police.

¶12

Bare perusal of documents annexed with the reply filed by respondent No. 1 suggests that in past Superintendent of Police has made corrections in the green sheet.

¶13

Faced with aforesaid situation, learned Additional Advocate General prays for and is granted two weeks’ time to file rejoinder.

¶14

List on 02.09.2025.”

¶15

Pursuant to afore order, learned Additional

¶16

Advocate General has placed on record communication dated 10.09.2025, issued under the signatures of Superintendent of Police, Solan, District Solan, HP, who also happens to be Chairman of the Committee. In afore communication, it has been further reiterated that on account of non-availability of record, which is stated to be lying deposited with the Courts detailed hereinabove, it may not possible for the applicant to do

¶17

the needful, in terms of mandate contained in the order, sought to be recalled.

¶18

Having taken note of fact that record is not available with the Chairman of the Committee i.e. SP Solan, there appears to be merit in the application and accordingly, the same is allowed. Ordered dated 11.03.2025 passed in Review Petition No.8/2025 is hereby recalled and reviewed to the extent that SP Solan-Chairman of the Committee concerned shall not be responsible for supplying the degree/mark sheet of law to the petitioner after making necessary correction, in terms of order, sought to be reviewed.

¶19

Admittedly, petitioner is not at fault, rather she has passed the examination, but on account of pendency of litigation, degree/mark sheet is not being released to her, as a result thereof, she is unable to do practice or pursue further studies. Since now it stands established that record from where verification and correction can be made is lying deposited with the Courts, as indicated hereinabove, this Court deems it fit to dispose of the present application, reserving liberty to the nonapplicant/petitioner to file application before learned trial Court or Special Judge, where the orignal mark sheet/decree sheet/registers already stand deposited and thereafter, learned trial Court may pass appropriate orders thereupon.

¶20

Since non-applicant/petitioner is running from pillar to post for getting his degree/mark sheet for quite long,

¶21

this Court hopes and trusts that needful shall be done by the learned trial Court or Special Judge expeditiously, preferably within ten days after the receipt of the application, if any, made pursuant to instant application.

¶22

September 12, 2025 (Sandeep Sharma), (s unil) Judge

Manav Bharti University and Another v. Asha Devi and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manav Bharti University and Another v. Asha Devi and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dharam Chand Vs Hrtc

Arati and Others Vs State of Hp and Ors.

Chitra Rajta and Others Vs the State of Hp and Another

Sunil Kumar Vs the State of Hp and Others

Surinder Kaur and Others Vs the State of Hp and Others

Vinod Kumar Vs Ashish Kohli