JUGAL KISHORE Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appeal was admitted for hearing on the following questions of law: 1. Whether on a proper construction of the provisions of the Indian Limitation Act, the suit was within limitation? 2. Whether the respondent, public bodies could be allowed to defeat the legitimate claim of the plaintiff by setting up narrow and technical plea of limitation? 3. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, Art. 113 of the Limitation Act applied to the case?

(2.) The facts, in brief, are that plaintiff on 30/04/1979, filed an application under Order XXXIII, Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter called as 'the Code'), seeking to sue the defendants as an indigent person. It was claimed by him that he was prosecuting his studies as a student of 8th class in Government Middle School, Ripoh Missran, District Una, during 1973-74. He appeared in the annual examination in the month of March, 1974 but was declared fail in the said examination. Suspecting some foul play, he approached the District Education Officer, Una, for re-evaluation of the answer-sheets. In the meanwhile he had already got himself admitted in 8th Class in Government High School, Amb, as a failed student of 8th Class. Through letter Ex. PW 1/A dated 11th Sept. 1974, the District Education Officer, informed the plaintiff that a decision had been taken to the effect that he is placed in compartment in mathematics and that he should join provisionally in the 9th class in any High School, subject to the ultimate clearance in the compartment in mathematics paper. A request thereafter, was made by him to the Headmaster, Government High School, Amb, to admit him in 9th Class, which request was turned down arbitrarily without any reason. Frustrated with this attitude, the plaintiff sought admission provisionally in the 9th class in Government High School, Joh, in District Una. He appeared in the mathematics paper for clearing his compartment in the month of March, 1975 but was not allowed to take the examination of 9th class by the Headmaster Government High School, Joh, to which class he had sought provisional admission. He continued studies even thereafter and during 1976 appeared in the 10th class examination conducted by Himachal Pradesh Board of School Education.

(3.) Despite the fact that the plaintiff had appeared in the mathematics paper for clearing his compartment in March, 1975, his result was not declared by the authorities and consequently declaration of the result of 10th class was also withheld by the Board. Plaintiff had been approaching the higher authorities through his father but without any effect. It is the plaintiff's case that defendants were bound to declare his result of 8th class in mathematics paper. The same could not have been withheld. Non-declaration of the result has resulted in causing irreparable loss and injury to him. He has not been in a position to prosecute his studies further. Thus alleging gross negligence, on the part of the defendants, he laid a claim of Rs. 1,00,000.00 against the defendants but confined it to Rs. 50,000.00, which was done after service of notice under Section 80 of the Code.