IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.1151 of 2005 1. The Magadh University through its Registrar, Magadh University, Bodh Gaya 2. The Vice Chancellor, Magadh University at Bodh Gaya, R/o Magadh University Campus 3. The Registrar, Magadh University at Bodh Gaya 4. Dy. Registrar, Magadh University, at Bodh Gaya 5. Controller of Examination, Magadh University at Body Gaya …. Appellants-Respondents Versus 1. Raka Sahay, Daughter of Shri R. N. Sahay, resident of House No.43, A.N.Path, North S. K., Puri, Patna-13 .. Petitioner-Respondent-1st Party 2. Director of L.N. Mishra Institute of Economics Development and Social Change, Baily Road, Patna 3. Registrar, L.N. Mishra Institute, Baily Road, Patna … Respondents ----------- 10 08.08.2011 This case was also listed on 04.08.2011 but as none had appeared on that day the matter was posted on 05.08.2011 under the heading “For Orders”. On 05.08.2011 also none had appeared on behalf of the respondents so the matter is posted for today under the same caption. Today, also none appears on behalf of the respondents. However, learned counsel for the appellants is present and the matter is being heard on merit basing on the material available with records of writ petition as well as the L.P.A. The present appeal has been filed against the order dated 05.07.2007 passed in 2 C.W.J.C. No. 5415 of 2003 being aggrieved by the order directing payment of compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- with 5% interest w.e.f. July, 1994. It has been contended by learned counsel for the appellants-University that the respondent secured admission to the course of Master of Business Administration in L.N. Mithila Institute of Economic Development and Social Change for the session 1991-93. On 05.02.2003, the petitioner-respondent herein made an application before the University for issuance of original degree and mark sheet but it was alleged that the same was issued to her after long delay, hence a writ petition was filed in which she sought compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- on the ground of delay occurred by the University and the same was allowed by the learned Single Judge. Hence, the present appeal. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the University further argued that the respondent never turned up to obtain the original degree and mark sheet and for the first time she made an application on 3 05.02.2003 and she was provided with the said marksheet on 20.04.2004. It is further contended that such certificate was issued to the respondent on 20.02.2004 after which she deposited the amount of Rs.1200/- which is required as processing fee. The provisional degree and mark sheet was issued to her on 20/27.02.2004, but the original certificate was issued on 30.06.2005. Learned counsel for the University further argued that although, there is delay in issuance of the marksheet and the provisional certificate but the delay occurred due to depositing of process fee as she deposited the process fee of Rs.1200/- sometimes on 02.03.2005. The learned counsel for the University has very fairly submitted that there is a little delay in issuance of the original degree and mark sheet but the delay is neither so fatal nor intentional. With regard to compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- it is submitted that as there is no material available on record from the respondent side that any financial loss has been caused to her to the extent of Rs.5,00,000/- therefore, there is no reason to order to 4 pay compensation. We also had the occasion to go through the entire material available on record, i.e. the statement made in paragraph 9 in her affidavit filed in support of writ petition, as well as paragraph 9 of the counter affidavit filed in the writ petition on behalf of the respondents in support of the writ petition to the effect that she made a representation to the University to issue her required certificate but there is no documentary evidence available on the record that she approached the University in writing within the interregnum period of 12 years form the date of passing of the M.B.A. rather she made an application, Annexure-2 to the L.P.A., on 05.02.2003. In absence of any such material in support of her allegation mentioned in paragraph 9 of the writ affidavit, it cannot be said that the University is responsible for the delay caused in issuing the marksheet and also the original certificate. Even though, there is a delay in issuance of the marksheet as contended by the counsel for the University, but the delay occurred because of the 5 lethargic attempt of the respondent, in view of not filing the required processing fee in time for any required certificate i.e. the migration certificate. Under the above circumstances, the University cannot be blamed for the delay in absence of any material available to this Court in support the contention raised by the respondent-herein in paragraph 9 of the writ petition that she has approached the University in writing several times. It cannot be said that the University should be burdened with the cost of Rs.5,00,000/- towards the compensation in absence of any material available on record. We are of the opinion that the order of learned Single Judge cannot be sustained with reference to payment of cost of Rs.5,00,000/- as compensation. Accordingly, such direction of the learned Single Judge is set aside and the appeal is allowed. Ashwini (T.Meena Kumari,J.) (Vikash Jain,J.)