IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.6059 of 2006 RAJ KUMAR MISTRY Versus BABA SAHEB BHIMRAO AMBEDKAR BIHAR UNIVERSITY,MUZAFFARPUR ----------- 11/ 04.07.2008 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the B.R.A. Bihar University (hereinafter referred to as the University for the sake of brevity). This writ petition has been filed for directing the respondents to publish the result of the petitioner with respect to Bachelor of Education Examination held in the year 1994, result of which regarding the petitioner has not been declared in absence of marks shown in one of the Method Papers despite the fact that the petitioner had appeared in each and every paper of the examination and even in cross list the petitioner has not been shown absent in that paper. It is not in dispute that subject no. III namely, Method Paper contains three papers, namely, General Method, Hindi and History for all of which three hours are given in the examination and the examinees are given three separate answer sheets for each of the said papers. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the marks were given in General Method and Hindi Papers but no marks, not even ‘Zero’, was shown in History Paper. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that it is absolutely impossible that petitioner could appear in only the other two papers except History, although examination of all three papers were taken during the same three hours. On the other hand, learned counsel for the University submits that paper no. III contains three sub-papers, namely, General method, Hindi and History for which separate answer sheets are given and it transpires that the petitioner has written on the answer sheets of General Method and Hindi Papers but he did not fill up the answer sheet of History Paper at all, therefore, no marks even Zero has been shown in that paper. He further submits that the examination was held in the year 1994 and in the same year results were also published but for twelve years the petitioner did not choose to challenge the said result and after twelve years this writ petition has been filed when the records have already been destroyed after three years of the examination as per the practice of the University since several decades. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, it is not in dispute that the petitioner has filed the instant writ petition after twelve years of declaration of result and no valid or proper reason has been shown by petitioner for such inordinate delay. Furthermore, there is no material to show that the petitioner had answered any question in History Paper of the said examination of 1994. Furthermore, due to lapse of such a long time the University can also not be directed to produce all the relevant papers as they have already been destroyed. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the relief claimed by the petitioner cannot be allowed. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed. harish/ (S.N.Hussain, J.)