The Patna High Court dismissed a writ petition filed by a B.Ed. student seeking relief against mandatory attendance regulations. The Court observed the petitioner had long, unverified absences and lacked seriousness, noting that institutional rules require strict adherence by all students.
Writ petition dismissed as it has no merit.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12561 of 2015
=========================================================== Kundan Kumar Son of Sri Jai Prakash Singh Resident of village- Berhna Shanti Tola, P.S.- Barh, District- Patna
.... .... Petitioner
Versus
.... .... Respondents
===========================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner : Mr. Pramod Kumar, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Santosh Chandra Bhaskar, AC to GP-11
=========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI ORAL JUDGMENT
Date: 15-11-2016
No student has a right to demand a relief of any kind against any institution, contrary to their Regulation. In the present case petitioner did not attend classes for a long long period of time in the second year of his course of B.Ed. The purported reason for such prolonged absence is said to be illness.
The supporting material with regard to such illness and that too such a prolonged illness running into months is not borne out from the records and the prescription, as such. Obviously it is a begotten kind of prescription contained in Annexure-7 to cover up the absence.
Earlier also the petitioner had approached the High
Patna High Court CWJC No.12561 of 2015 dt.15-11-2016
2/2
Court. The Court gave direction upon the respondents to consider his request strictly in accordance with the regulations governing such issues.
It is evident that a minimum of 85% of attendance is mandatory for every student who has taken admission in such course. Apparently, the petitioner does not appear to be a serious kind of student. He simply intends to somehow acquire a degree so that he can join the queue for appointment. Such non-serious student cannot be given leeway beyond the ambit of the Regulation.
Writ has no merit. It is dismissed.
(Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J)
Pawan/-
| AFR/NAFR | NAFR |
|---|---|
| CAVDATE | N/A |
| Uploading Date | 16.11.2016 |
| Transmission Date |
N/A |
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a student with prolonged unverified absence can demand relief against institutional regulations regarding minimum attendance.
Whether the mandatory 85% attendance requirement for B.Ed. students can be relaxed for a non-serious student seeking faculty appointment.
KUNDAN KUMAR SON OF SRI JAI PRAKASH SINGH
THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH PRINCIPAL SECRETARY EDUCATION DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR PATNA
THE DIRECTOR RESEARCH AND TRAINING EDUCATION DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR PATNA
THE DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICER PATNA
THE DISTRICT PROGRAMME OFFICER (SARVA SHIKSHA ABHIYAN) PATNA
THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING BIKRAM PATNA
AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
