IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.14386 of 2007 Md.Aftab Alam Son of late Haji Md. Irfan, Resident of village Saidpur, P.O. Karankia, P.S. Basaithi (Ramganaj), District-Araria …….. Petitioner. VERSUS 1. The State of Bihar through the Secretary, Department of Human Resources Development, Government of Bihar, Patna. 2. The Secretary, Bihar School Examination Board, Patna. 3. The Principal, Millia Sir Syed Primary Teachers Training College, Ram Bagh, Purnea. ……. Respondents. WITH CWJC No. 10659 of 2007 1. Sanjeev Kumar Bhagat Son of Sri Bande Lal Bhagat, Resident of Village- Parasmani, P.O.-Parasmani, P.S.-Sarsi, District-Purnea. 2. Naresh Kumar Mandal Son of Sri Chhatis Mandal, Resident of Village- Abhiya, P.O.-Abhiya Bazar, P.S.-Gopalpur, District-Bhagalpur. 3. Raj Kishore Chaudhary Son of Bharatgun Chaudhary, Resident of Village- Khairpur, P.O.-Akidapur, P.S.-Kharik Bazar, District-Bhagalpur. ………. Petitioners. VERSUS 1. Bihar School Examination Board, Sinha Library Road, Patna through its Secretary. 2. The Chairman, Bihar School Examination Board, Sinha Library Road, Patna. 3. The Secretary, Bihar School Examination Board, Sinha Library Road, Patna. …….. Respondents. ----------- Counsel for the Petitioners : Mr. Bipin Bihari Singh. Mr. Helal Ahmad. Counsel for the Respondents : Mr. Gyan Shankar. Mr. S.N. Pathak. ------------- 03 03.02.2009 The petitioners in both this writ applications alleged to have persuaded their Primary Teachers Training Course from Millia Sir Sayed Primary Teachers Training College, Rambagh, Purnea. They had appeared in the primary teachers training examination and have come to this Court for declaration of their results. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the Bihar School Examination Board, it is stated that the petitioners’ institution had provisional recognition granted to it by the State Government in the year 1991 with retrospective effect, which was cancelled in the year 1994. - 2 - Students were of the batch in between, but the Board states that while granting recognition to the institution the State Government had granted recognition for only 100 students per batch, petitioners were beyond the strength of 100 students, as would be evident from their roll nos. itself. It is further stated that the results of 100 students of the said institution for petitioners’ batch had already been declared over a decade back and petitioners did not make any grievance. Now making a grievance after a decade is only to take advantage of the fact that the Board has got no records of petitioners’ appearing in the examination, apart from the admit cards as set up by the petitioners. In my view, once recognition has been granted in respect of 100 students, any student admitted beyond that number cannot be held to be a bona fide student. If the petitioners had any grievance, when the results were published over a decade back, they should have approached to this Court at that time, not having done so. The petitioner cannot be allowed to pursue these writ applications, which are dismissed on the ground of delay and laches, apart from beyond the sanctioned strength. Trivedi/ (Navaniti Prasad Singh,J.)