IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Review No.202 of 2009 In (CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE 5444/2007) 1. Bihar School Examination Board, through its Secretary, Sinha Library Road, Patna…Respondent no.1. 2. The Chairman, Bihar School Examination Board, Sinha Library Road, Patna…Respondent No.2. 3. The Secretary, Bihar School Examination Board, Sinha Library Road, Patna………………………………Respondent No.3/Petitioners Versus 1. Mithilesh Kumari , wife of Shri Surendra Prasad Yadav, daughter of Shri Shatrughna Yadav, resident of village Sundarvirajit, Police Station Madhepur, District Madhubani….Petitioner No.1. 2. Uma Kumari, wife of Shri Ram Naresh Yadav, daughter of Ram Barosh Roy, resident of village Majhaura, Police Station Bahera, District Darbhanga………….Petitioner No.2/Opposite Parties ---------------------------------- 6 17.08.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned counsel for the opposite parties. This petition has been filed for modification of the order dated 13.08.2008 passed in CWJC No. 5444 of 2007. By the said order, while disposing of the writ application, this Court had directed the Secretary of the Bihar School Examination Board (hereinafter referred to as the “Board”) to enquire about the candidature of the petitioners and, if he found from the records of the 2 Board that the petitioners had actually appeared in the examination and had passed the same, he was directed to issue the original certificates within a period of one month from the date of receipt/production of a copy of the order. Petitioners were granted liberty to file representations along with photo copies of admit cards and mark sheets issued to them before the Board. Petitioners, accordingly, filed their representation on 18.09.2008. No orders having been passed on the same and certificates having not been issued to them, they filed M.J.C. No. 786 of 2009 on 20.02.2009. It appears that, when the functionaries of the Board came to know about filing of the contempt application, they finally woke up and filed this review petition on 24.07.2009 i.e. almost one year after passing of the order in the writ matter. The ground mentioned in the review petition for review of the order is that directions of the Court to the Secretary of the Board had narrowed 3 down the enquiry by the Secretary only with regard to appearance of the petitioners in the examination and to ascertain as to whether they had passed the examination. Upon verification of those facts, the Secretary had to issue original certificates to the petitioners. The submission is that since the institution was not recognized during the relevant period, petitioners are not entitled to get their certificates even if they had appeared in the examination and had passed. If that was so, it was open to the learned counsel appearing for the Board to take that objection in the writ matter itself, which apparently he did not take. If the functionaries of the Board were aggrieved by the order passed in the writ matter, they had sufficient time to file review petition within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of the order or to prefer an appeal against the said order. This, they have not done and they have filed this review petition only after contempt application was filed. 4 In the circumstances, this Court finds that the review petition is not bona fide. The same is, accordingly, dismissed. B.T. (J.N. Singh, J.)