IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.10550 of 2011 Sanjiv Kumar S/O Sri Bhumneshwar Prasad Singh R/O Village Bagroiya, P.O.-Makaita, P.S.-Dhoraiya, Distt.-Banka Versus 1. The State of Bihar 2. The Secretary, Bihar School Examination Board, Patna 3. The Deputy Secretary, Bihar School Examination Board, Patna 4. The District Magistrate, Banka 5. The District Superintendent of Education (D.S.E.), Banka. ----------- For the petitioner: Mr. Manoj Kumar Jha For the Examination Board : Mr. S S Mishra For the State: Ms. Nutan Sahay, AC to SC 1. ------ 04. 17.10.2011 Annexure-4 is the result sent by the Bihar School Examination Board to the Principal of Primary Teachers Training College, Phulwariya at Bhagalpur wherein petitioner has been shown to have failed due to absence in one paper. Annexure-4 is dated 25.2.2006. Writ has now been filed in the year 2011 that after petitioner has obtained some information and evidence he can assert that he had appeared in the concerned paper or sat in the examination on that day and therefore, showing the petitioner having failed on the basis of absence in one paper is uncalled for. The sheet anchor of the petitioner’s case is based on Annexure-11/A, which is supposed to have been the document to show the number of candidates who appeared in the said examination including the number of candidates who were expelled or absent. Roll number of the petitioner does not figure in the same. Taking into consideration Annexure-11/A the Court 2 directed the respondent authorities to file a detailed counter affidavit and explain as to why the result of the petitioner cannot be declared or has been shown to have failed. Stand indicated in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the Examination Board that so far records of Examination Board is concerned, petitioner is absent in one subject i.e. education problem and school management, seems to be based on thorough examination of all the records available with the authorities. Now the standard marks foil, answer books or the bunch of answer sheets received from the Examination Board shows that petitioner did appear in the said paper. Respondent authorities as far back as on 16.2.2006 (Annexure-3) wrote a letter to the Principal of the Primary Teachers Training College, Phulwariya to explain the circumstances but no response came from them. Left with no option and treating the petitioner to be absent he was shown to have failed in the above circumstance. Whatever be the force in the submission of the counsel in support of the writ application, the Court cannot go by virtue of one piece of document when there is emphatic denial with regard to absence of petitioner and no other existence of evidence of the petitioner having appeared in the said paper on that day. If that be so and the dispute of the kind being what it is, no case for issuance of a mandamus is made out upon the respondents because there are many a grey areas which has not 3 been fully explained or controverted by the petitioner. Writ is dismissed. rkp ( Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.)