IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.5930 of 2008 MAHESH KUMAR & ANR Versus THE BIHAR SCHOOL EXAM.BOARD & ORS ----------- For the Petitioners : M/s Mahendra Pd.Gupta & Brajesh Kumar,Adv. For the Respondents : Mr.Girijesh Kumar,Adv. ---------- 2. 12/09/2008 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the Board. This writ application has been filed for quashing of Annexure-11, an order dated 11.8.2007 passed by the Secretary of the Bihar School Examination Board on the representation of the petitioners pursuant to an order passed by this Court in C.W.J.c.No.14143 of 2006 dated 30.5.2007 by which the Board was directed to dispose of earlier representations filed by the petitioners in the light of certificate dated 17.7.2006. Case of the petitioners is that they were students of Primary Teachers Training College, Mahendru, Patna of the sessions 1998-99. After completion of the course, they appeared in all the papers including practical examination of 7th paper of Arts and Music. Result of the said examination was published in June, 2005 but the - 2 - petitioners did not find their names amongst successful candidates. Thereafter, they made an enquiry and found that they had not secured minimum qualifying 18 marks in the said practical examination of 7th paper and therefore they were declared fail. Petitioners filed representations before the authorities of the Board vide Annexures-4 and 5 for reconsideration of their case stating therein that they believed that due to some mistake they have been declared fail in the said practical examination. In the said representations, petitioners did not contend that the external examiner had made a mistake and in fact he had allotted 19 marks to them which was wrongly recorded in the marks foil as 17. However, later on, petitioners obtained certificate from the Principal of the College on 17.7.2006 in which the Principal of the College certified that due to human error 19 marks allotted to the petitioners by the external examiner had been wrongly mentioned as 17 in the marks foil. Along with the said certificate petitioners again filed another representation and as the same was not considered, they moved this Court, as stated - 3 - earlier. Now, representations of the petitioners have been rejected by the Secretary of the Board on the ground that the human error committed by the external examiner is being raised by the petitioners after a year and therefore, the same is not acceptable. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in Annexure-7 initials of two external examiners, who were Principals of different Institutions, are also there. However, from Annexure-7 it does not appear that the said external examiner from his own knowledge had certified that he himself committed mistake of putting 17 marks on the marks foil in place of 19. Moreover, fact is that this certificate is being issued and obtained by the petitioners after more than one year of publication of the result and after filing repeated representations earlier in which this stand was not taken by them. Obviously the said certificate (Annexure-7) dated 17.7.2006 is a manufactured document with a view to give undue advantage to the petitioners. Since the same has been issued after one year of publication of the result of the petitioners, - 4 - obviously it could not acceptable by the Board. In the circumstances, I do not find any merit in this writ application. It is accordingly dismissed. Pradeep/ (J. N. Singh, J.)