IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.55 of 2010 1. RAM PRAVESH PRASAD @ RAM PRAVESH YADAV S/O SRI YADU NANDAN PRASAD, FATHER OF SHOBHA KUMARI R/O VILL.- ALIPUR, P.S. HILSA, DISTT.- NALANDA Versus 1. THE BIHAR SCHOOL EXAMINATION BOARD, PATNA THROUGH SECRETARY 2. THE CHAIRMAN BIHAR SCHOOL EXAMINATION BOARD, PATNA 3. THE HEAD MASTER R.B.HIGH SCHOOL, HILSA NALANDA ----------- 3/ 03/08/2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the Bihar School Examination Board, Patna (hereinafter referred to as the „Board‟). The daughter of the petitioner Shobha Kumari is stated to have appeared in the Matriculation Examination-2007 conducted by the respondent Board. She was a student of R.C.P. Gupta High School, Hilsa which is stated to be a Government recognized school. She did not clear the examination. The candidate then filled up the form for the Matriculation examination afresh in the year-2008 to be conducted by the respondent Board as a student of the R.B. High School, Hilsa which is also a Government recognized School. The respondent Board then issued her an admit card. She appeared at the examination and cleared the same successfully in the 1st division. Her result has also been published. Her requests for supply of the mark-sheet and the Matriculation certificate not having been met by the Board she has filed the present writ application. - 2 - A counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the respondent Board. The contention of the Board is that the registration granted to a candidate to appear at the Matriculation examination is co-terminus with the institution where the candidate has studied. The candidate was granted a registration certificate earlier as a student of R.C.P. Gupta High School, Hilsa. That registration automatically came to an end the moment she sought to appear for the Matriculation examination afresh as a student of R.B. High School, Hilsa. This required a separate registration/admission to be obtained by her in the latter school and only whereafter she could have appeared at the fresh examination. The candidate could not have appeared again in 2008 from a different institution based on an admission and registration from an earlier institution. The Board subsequent to the filing of the present writ petition issued notice to the R.B. High School, Hilsa and asked him to submit his reply. The reply dated 10.2.2010 is that at the time of issuance of the School Leaving Certificate the error had been detected and her School Leaving Certificate was being withheld. In what circumstances her candidature for the examination had been sponsored by the school was for the earlier Principal to answer who had superannuated and the - 3 - clerk concerned transferred. He relies upon Chapter-V, Rule-19 of the Bihar School Examination Board Regulations which reads as follows:- “Rule-19. In any case where the result of the examination has been ascertained and published and it is found that such result has been affected by error, malpractice, fraud, or any other cause whereby an examinee has in the opinion of the Board been party to or privy to or connived at such mal-practice, fraud or improper conduct the Board shall have power at any time, notwithstanding the issue of the certificate to amend the result of such examinee and to make declaration as it may consider necessary in that behalf.” On a bare perusal of Regulation-19 it is apparent that it visualizes an enquiry. There has to be a finding that the examinee was party or privy to such malpractice, fraud or improper conduct. Only in those circumstances could the result be amended notwithstanding the issuance of certificate. The show cause issued by the Board to the R.B. High School, Hilsa and the reply filed by the school nowhere suggests that the candidate had any role to play in it. On the contrary, it seeks to fix responsibility on the erstwhile Principal and the clerk concerned. If what the Board contends is correct and there had been fraud, malpractice etc., as urged, the examination having been held in March-2008, the matters having come to the attention of the Board on - 4 - filing of the writ application in January, 2010, surely, if the Board professes to act by a higher code of conduct, that is the standard by which this Curt shall test the conduct of the Board itself. There is no explanation or statement in the counter affidavit whether a First Information Report had been lodged against the officials of R.B. High School, Hilsa and government authorities or not. Learned Counsel for the Board submits that the Board shall proceed to do so. The fact of the matter remains that the candidate has appeared at the examination and passed in the 1st division. The admit card was issued by the Board itself. No enquiry as visualized under Regulation-19 has been held till date. The Board has chosen not to lodge a First Information Report against the officials of the R.B. High School, Hilsa. In the aforesaid circumstances this Court is satisfied that once the petitioner had been permitted to appear by the Board, it cannot withhold her result. The result has to be published and this Court so direct that her mark-sheet and Matriculation certificate be made available to her. This Court shall hold the Board bound by the standards by which it professes to act. If the board issues a show cause notice to the R.B. High School, Hilsa for annulment of recognition and proceeds to lodge a First - 5 - Information Report against the concerned officials and after charge-sheet against the officials is filed, the Board takes recourse to Regulation-19 against the candidate, the powers of the Board under Regulation-19 shall remain uninhibited. The order of the Board dated 17.3.2010 being contrary to Regulation-19 is accordingly set aside. The writ application stands allowed. KC ( Navin Sinha, J.)