IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.1455 of 2007 NAND KISHOR MAHTO, SON OF LATE RAM LAKHAN MAHTO, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE-DEDAUL, POST OFFICE-MIRAPUR, POLICE STATION-SAKRA, DISTRICT-MUZAFFARPUR. ……………………………………………….. PETITIONER Versus 1. THE BIHAR SCHOOL EXAMINATION BOARD, THROUGH ITS SECRETARY, BIHAR, PATNA. 2. THE PRINCIPAL, S.M.ZAHIR ALAM PHYSICAL TRAINING COLLEGE, BAHERA, DISTRICT-DARBHANGA. ……………………………………………….. RESPONDENTS ----------- 9 22.5.2009 Heard counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the State as also counsel for the Bihar School Examination Board, hereinafter referred to as the Board. The grievance of the petitioner in this writ application which has been filed on 5.2.2007 is with regard to declaration of the result and issuance of certificate and mark- sheet of the petitioner of C.P.Ed. Examination Session 1989-90 conducted in the year 1994. This Court would find that the writ application filed in the year 2007 as with regard to an examination conducted in the year 1994 by the Board is wholly belated and in absence of an explanation to this effect, the same cannot be condoned. Apart from the delay, the questions that the petitioner would like to agitate on merits 2 cannot find favour from this Court. It is so because the said Diploma in Physical Education Course envisages the college examination in the mid sessions on the pattern of the Board Examination in each paper of such Part-1, Part-2 and Part-3. Such examination by the college has to be conducted for 100 marks and 1/5th of the marks obtained in each paper and each group is to be known as College Marks and this College Marks has to be sent to the Board before the commencement of the examination for its being added in the marks obtained by the candidate in their respective subjects during Board Examination. Counsel for the Board would submit that no such college marks for the petitioner was received when the examination was conducted in the year 1994 and therefore, if today, the petitioner is producing something from college by way of marks without there being any authentic material to show that they were secured out of 100 marks and were also sent in time to the Board, they cannot be accepted to be gospel truth. In that view of the matter, the counsel 3 for the Board would justify the decision taken by the Board for award of 1/5th marks as secured by the candidates in the Board Examination by way of College Marks. All these questions could have been taken into consideration had the petitioner approached this Court in time. This Court would in fact find that after thirteen years even tracing of those answer books either by the Board or by the College would be impossible. In fact, noticing this very aspect in a similar case, this Court by an order dated 12th November, 2008 in C.W.J.C. No. 8739 of 2006 has dismissed the writ application only on the ground of unexplained delay in moving this Court. The case of the petitioner being based on similar footing as that of the petitioner of C.W.J.C. No. 8739 of 2006, this writ application must be dismissed and it is ordered accordingly. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)