CHAMPAK KUMAR Vs. SECRETARY, BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order disposes of W.P. no. 10209/2005 and W.P. No. 3480 Of 2006. Reference to Annexures is taken from W.P. No. 10209/05.

(2.) Short facts leading to the petition are that the petitioner (Champak Kumar Shiv) and respondent no. 3 (Chandanrao Chouhan) were studying in Boys Government Higher Secondary School, Birsa, Tahsil Baihar, District Balaghat. Both were regular students of 12th standard in the academic session 2000-2001. Their names were forwarded to the Board of Secondary Education, M.P. (hereinafter referred to as the "Board" for convenience) alongwith particulars of other students. The Board sent a nominal roll as contained in Annexure P/1. Entries contained in nominal roll were verified by Principal of respondent no. 2, as revealed in endorsement of the Principal, contained at the end of Annexure P/1. Names of petitioner and respondent no. 3 were placed at serial numbers 4 and 5 of the nominal roll (Annexure P/1) respectively. In Annexure P/1 they were awarded roll numbers 27817210 and 27817211 respectively. Examination forms of the students who were to appear in the Higher Secondary School Certificate Examination (10+2) were issued by the Board to the School. They were sent back to the Board from the school after they were filled up and signed by the respective students and after due attestation about correction of their contents by the Principal of the School. Roll Numbers of the students were entered on such application forms by the Office of the Board and they were again sent to the school at the time of examination alongwith the admit cards. Admits cards were issued by the School to the students and signatures of the concerning students were obtained on the backside of examination forms at the time of appearing in the examination of each subject.

(3.) At the time of examination it came in to the notice of respondent no. 2 that although roll number 27817210 was of the petitioner as per the nominal roll contained in Annexure P/1, roll number 27817211 was mentioned on his admit card. Similarly, it came into the notice of the respondent no. 2 that although roll number 27817211 was given to respondent no. 3, on his admit card roll no. 27817210 was mentioned. The respondent no. 2 himself corrected the roll numbers on admit cards mentioning by way of overwriting 27817210 on the admit card of the petitioner and roll no. 27817211 on the admit card of respondent no. 3. This was done by respondent no. 2 without any permission/sanction from the Board and further without any intimation to the Board.