Civil Writ Petition No.1887 of 2011 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.1887 of 2011 Date of Order: 16th September, 2011 Kerrin Sharma through her mother Dr. Indu Sharma. ...Petitioner Versus Punjab School Education Board and others ..Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIVE BHALLA Present:Dr. Indu Sharma, petitioner in person Dr. B.M.Singh, Advocate for respondent nos.1 and 3 RAJIVE BHALLA, J The petitioner, a minor, represented by her mother prays for quashing letter dated 27.01.2011 (Annexure P-16) whereby the petitioner was directed to appear in additional subjects of the semester system i.e. Social Studies, Home Science and Physical Education. It is further prayed that a writ in the nature of mandamus be issued to respondent no.1 to issue a pass certificate to the petitioner's daughter for the subjects Punjabi, English, Hindi, Mathematics and Science, being an old student. The petitioner's mother submits that the petitioner, a Kumar Naresh N 2011.09.21 12:16 verified High Court Chandigarh Civil Writ Petition No.1887 of 2011 -2- minor applied through Zee Study Point School, Manupur, District Fatehgarh Sahib as a regular/open school candidate for the matriculation examination. A receipt of Rs.7400/- was issued to her by respondent no.4. The petitioner received roll No.654763 from the respondent-Board. The petitioner was declared fail as she did not pass in Punjabi, Mathematics and Social Studies. Upon enquiry it transpired that respondent no.4 had forwarded the petitioner's form as a private candidate instead of as a regular/open school candidate. After considering arguments addressed by the petitioner's mother and counsel for the Board, the following order was passed on 18.08.2011:- “The Board, unaware of the conduct of respondent no.4, treated the petitioner's daughter as a private candidate, and as she had not passed “Punjabi, Mathematics and Social Studies”, declared her fail in the matriculation examination. At this stage, it would be necessary to mention that in case the petitioner's daughter had been treated as a regular school/open school candidate, she would not be required to pass “Mathematics and Social Studies” but would be required to pass “Mathematics or Social Studies”. Kumar Naresh N 2011.09.21 12:16 verified High Court Chandigarh Civil Writ Petition No.1887 of 2011 -3- The petitioner's daughter was forced, for no fault on her part to once again appear in the entire examination in the new system introduced by the Board, namely, a semester system”. In response to this order, the respondents have filed an affidavit of Mrs. Sukhwinder Kaur Saroya, Controller of Examinations, Punjab School Education Board, SAS Nagar (Mohali), reiterating the stand taken in the reply that as they received the form as a private candidate, no benefit can be extended to the petitioner. A perusal of the above order reveals that a clear finding has been recorded that the petitioner was duped by respondent no.4 as he forwarded her examination form as a private candidate, whereas she had applied as a regular/open school candidate. The difference between the two types of candidates is that a private candidate is required to pass Punjabi with four subjects from Group-A, whereas a regular school/open school candidate is required to pass Punjabi with three subjects. The petitioner's result was declared as a private candidate. The finding that respondent no.4 duped the petitioner was recorded as respondent no.4, despite appearing through counsel, chose not to file any reply controverting the allegations levelled against him. The Board was required to take note of this finding and thereafter reconsider the matter after taking a Kumar Naresh N 2011.09.21 12:16 verified High Court Chandigarh Civil Writ Petition No.1887 of 2011 -4- sympathetic view of the matter by treating the petitioner as a regular/open school candidate. The Board has disregarded the above finding and once again reverted to the plea that as the admission form was received as a private candidate, the Board cannot treat the petitioner as a regular/ open school candidate. Fraud by its very nature vitiates every act. The act of respondent no.4 in forwarding the form as a private candidate instead of as a regular/open school candidate, is vitiated by fraud. The finding that the petitioner was defrauded has been disregarded by the Board as it appears to have arrogated to itself, the right to pass an order by ignoring the finding of fraud. The absence of a rule or regulation cannot deprive a student of relief, where the student has been duped by an agency of the Board. The respondent-Board shall, therefore, be required to treat Kerrin Sharma, as a private candidate for the relevant examination and pass necessary consequential orders irrespective of whether the petitioner's daughter has passed the subsequent matriculation examination under the semester system. Before parting with the judgment, this Court would like to place on record its dismay at the conduct of the Board. The Board has disregarded the finding the petitioner was duped by respondent no.4 and though accepting that it is required to take action against respondent no.4, has chosen to decline relief to the petitioner. The Board, set up to look after the education of Kumar Naresh N 2011.09.21 12:16 verified High Court Chandigarh Civil Writ Petition No.1887 of 2011 -5- children includes an obligation to rectify wrongs, particularly where its agents have committed fraud. To hide behind rules and regulations reveals a lack of understanding of its role as a facilitator of education. As a consequence, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the Board to declare the relevant 10th class result of the petitioner by considering the petitioner as a regular/open school candidate, within a week of the receipt of a certified copy of this order. A certified copy of this order may be sent to the petitioner. September 16, 2011 (RAJIVE BHALLA) nt JUDGE Kumar Naresh N 2011.09.21 12:16 verified High Court Chandigarh