IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.7417 of 2010 SUJEET KRISHNA, S/O SATISH PANJIYAR, R/O MOHALLA- BAKARGANJ, P.O.& P.S. LAHERIASARAI, DISTRICT- DARBHANGA. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY,GOVERNMENT OF BIHAR, PATNA. 2. THE DIRECTOR,DEPARTMENT OF SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY,BIHAR, PATNA. 3. THE CHANCELLOR OF UNIVERSITIES (GOVERNER),BIHAR PATNA. 4. THE VICE-CHANCELLOR, B.R. AMBEDKAR,BIHAR UNIVERSITY,MUZAFFARPUR. 5. THE PRINCIPAL MUZAFFARPUR INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY (M.I.T) MUZAFFARPUR. ----------- FOR THE PETITIONER : M/S BARUN KUMAR CHAUDHARY AND LALIT NARAYAN JHA, ADVOCATES FOR THE STATE : MR.ASHOK KUMAR KESHRI,AAG-XI WITH MR.SANTOSH KR.SINGH,A.C. TO AAG-XI FOR THE UNIVERSITY : MR.AJAY BEHARI SINHA,ADVOCATE. ----------- 3. 03/03/2011 Petitioner has filed this writ application for a direction to the Principal of Muzaffarpur Institute of Technology, Muzaffarpur to allow him to attend first year classes again in the next session. It appears that the petitioner was earlier admitted in the first year of Engineering course in the Institute some time around November, 2008. Thereafter, he absented from attending the classes from January, 2009 itself and remained absent till September, 2009. After September, 2009, he approached the Principal of the Institute to allow him to 2 attend classes, who refused the same on the ground that the regulation does not permit rejoining of the student, who has not attended classes for such a long period. Petitioner thereafter approached the Director, Department of Science and Technology, who issued orders to the Principal contained in letter no.3371 dated 9.12.2009, annexed as Annexure-4 series, to allow the petitioner to attend classes along with students of sessions 2009-10, but his Sessions was to remain 2008-09. This order was not complied with by the Principal. Therefore petitioner has moved this Court. Stand of the petitioner before the Director, Department of Science and Technology as well as in this Court is that he was suffering from prolonged illness and was confined to bed on medical advice during the entire period. In support of such claim, petitioner has produced a certificate of one Dr.R.N.Shukla of Laheriasarai, annexed as Annexure-2 series along with his representation before the Principal. The certificate shows that the doctor is a private doctor and not in Basic Health cadre of the Government or in Medical College, Darbhanga. 3 The certificate shows that petitioner was suffering from ailment of Type-II Nephritish for which he was advised to take complete bed rest. Thus, he remained confined to bed from 6.1.2009 to 13.9.2009. There is no supporting document along with this certificate in the form of reports of any clinical test. It is also surprising that this certificate is dated 13.9.2009 and not of 6.1.2009 from which date petitioner has allegedly remained confined to bed. If petitioner was suffering from any serious illness, he must have consulted doctor and must have been issued prescription with advice for clinical test etc. on day one itself. There is nothing on record in this respect. The medical certificate dated 13.9.2009 produced by the petitioner therefore does not inspire confidence. The Principal of the Institute has appeared and filed affidavit that Regulation does not permit him to allow a student, who absented for such a long time, to rejoin his classes, which stand is being supported by learned counsel appearing for the University also. In the circumstances, this Court does not 4 find it appropriate to issue any direction to the concerned authority to allow the petitioner to re-join his classes in the Institute. However, since the Director, Department of Science and Technology has passed orders in favour of the petitioner, he will be at liberty to approach the Director for compliance of his directions. This writ application is disposed of. Pradeep/ ( J. N. Singh,J.)