IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12069 of 2007 Leelawati Kumari, D/o Butan Sharma, wife of Surendra Rai, resident of village Bara, P.O. Kharauni, P.S. Bihiya, District Bhojpur (Ara) … Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar through the Commissioner cum Secretary, Human Resources Development Department Education, Govt. of Bihar, New Secretariat, Patna 2. The Secretary, Bihar School Examination Board, Sinha Library Road, Patna 3. The Director Research and Training Department, Govt. of Bihar, New Secretariat, Patna 4. The District Magistrate, Bhojpur (Ara) 5. The District Education Officer, Bhojpur (Ara) 6. The District Superintendent of Education, Bhojpur (Ara) 7. The Block Development Officer, Bihiya, Bhojpur (Ara) 8. The Block Education Extension Officer, Bihiya, Bhojpur (Ara) 9. The Mukhiya Gram Panchayat Raj Pipra Jagdish, Bhiya, Bhojpur (Ara) 10. The Secretary, Gram Panchayat Raj Pipra Jagdish Bihiya, Bhojpur (Ara) … Respondents ---------------------------------- 5. 11.8.2011 Heard counsel for the parties. In this writ application the petitioner seeks the following relief: “To direct and command the respondent authorities to issue original certificate to the petitioner who passed the Primary Teachers Training Examination in academic Session 1985-1987 from Ismail Karim Primary Teachers Training College, Chaknoor, P.O. Rahmatpur, District Samastipur, Bihar (hereinafter referred to as the College) and obtained marksheet and the respondent be further directed not to interfere with petitioner working in the respective place.” From the bare reading of the aforementioned prayer it would be clear that the petitioner after almost 20 years of completing her training course has moved this Court for a 2 direction for issuance of her original certificate in support of claiming to have passed Primary Teachers Training Examination in academic Session 1985-1987. Such a long delay in moving this Court has been only explained that as the petitioner had required the said certificate for the purposes of continuing in employment, the petitioner cannot be deprived of the said relief, especially when it is an admitted fact that she had appeared in such examination and her results were also declared. The respondents have filed a counter affidavit wherein it has been stated that the delay of 13 years in L.P.A.No. 431/2005 was held to be fatal for maintaining a writ petition as with regard to publication of result. It has also been stated in the counter affidavit that the College in question from which the petitioner is said to have passed such training examination had not been recognized and as such, when the students of the same batch had moved this Court for declaration of their result in C.W.J.C.No. 10364/2006 the same was dismissed by the learned Single Judge by his order dated 12.9.1996 wherein it was held as follows: “ The order, as quoted above, makes it abundantly clear that the results of the students shall be published but such results shall be subject to recognition of the said College. That means that in the event, the College is recognized, the students shall be entitled to the benefit of the results but in the event the College is not recognized, the students will not be entitled to the benefit of the results. Inasmuch as the College has 3 not been recognized, despite the result, the petitioner cannot take the benefit of the result. What would he do with the result, which is meaningless. The Court’s order dated 15th January, 1992 has reached finality. In the result, there is nothing to be done in view of non-recognition of the institution, for in terms of the said order, which has reached finality, even if the petitioner is successful at the said examination, he cannot take the advantage of the same, for the institution is not recognized.” Learned counsel for the respondents has also pointed out that when the said order of the learned Single Judge in C.W.J.C.No. 10364/2006 was assailed in appeal, being L.P.A.No. 655/2007 that too was dismissed by a Division Bench by an order dated 22nd September, 2008. He would, accordingly, submit that when the result of the petitioner has already been cancelled pursuant to the direction of this Court there would be no question of issuing any certificate of the petitioner. Counsel for the petitioner, however, would point out that the Bihar School Examination Board had issued a communiqué as with regard to cancellation of the result only on 3.4.2011 i.e. during the pendency of this writ application and therefore, when the said order is already subject matter of a new writ petition, C.W.J.C.No. 9017/2011 filed by the similarly situated persons, this writ application should also be tagged alongwith the said writ application. In the considered opinion of this Court as the said 4 order dated 3.4.2011 has not been assailed in this writ application there would be no question of tagging this writ application which was only confined to the relief of issuance of certificate of the petitioner. As noted above, the result of the said examination having been cancelled the petitioner cannot be issued any certificate. None-the-less if the petitioner feels so aggrieved by the fresh press communiqué dated 3.4.2011 she will have the liberty to file a fresh writ application assailing the said order. With the aforementioned observations and liberty, this application is disposed of. (Mihir Kumar Jha,J.) Surendra/