SANTOSH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this writ application, petitioner has prayed for a direction to the respondents to publish his result of final year examination of Trade Fitter held in the month of July, 2002.

(2.) IT is stated that the petitioner, after passing Matriculation examination, applied for admission in the Trade of Fitter in the Industrial Training Institute, Muzaffarpur on 8.11.2000 with deposit of requisite fee. A copy of the receipt of deposit of requisite fee is annexed as Annexure -1 to this application. Petitioner was thereafter selected and admitted in the Institute and completed the course of Trade of Fitter. After completing the course, he submitted his application, for registration with requisite fee for appearing in the examination. He was allowed to fill up the form of examination and admit card was issued to him, pursuant to which he appeared in the final examination held in the month of July, 2002. It is stated that when the result of the petitioner was not published, he approached the respondents for the same but to no avail. Hence this writ application. In the writ application, petitioner has referred to orders passed by this court in different writ applications, copies whereof are annexed as Annexures -3, 4 and 5, and claims himself to be similarly situated and therefore prays for a similar order by this Court.

(3.) A counter affidavit has been filed in this case by the respondents. In the counter affidavit, it is stated that, in the background of large number of irregularities having been committed in the examination held by the Industrial Training Institutes all over the State, an Enquiry Committee was constituted to examine the cases of all the candidates who appeared in the examination. The Enquiry Committee examined the case of the petitioner also and found that the petitioner had in fact applied for and deposited fee for Electrician Trade. However, while making interpolation in the receipt of deposit of fee, as contained in Annexure -1, he got himself admitted in the Fitter Trade and completed the course and appeared in the examination, before the Matriculation in the money receipt, as contained in Annexure -1, was detected by the authorities. In support of their stand with regard to interpolation in the money receipt (Annexure -1), respondents have produced carbon copy of the money receipt granted to the petitioner as Annexure -A. It is also stated in the counter affidavit that for Fitter Trade minimum 60% marks was required in the Matriculation examination which the petitioner did not had and thus the petitioner. was not eligible for admission in Fitter Trade. A photocopy of the notification prescribing minimum percentage of marks for different Trade has been annexed as Annexure -B and the mark -sheet of the petitioner of Matriculation examination is annexed as Annexure -C to the counter affidavit. It is stated that on the basis of finding of the Enquiry Committee, admission of the petitioner in the Fitter Trade and his result was cancelled vide Annexure -D dated 16.11.2004. Respondents have also relied upon an order of the division Bench passed in the case of one Awadhesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar in L.P.A. No. 450 of 2005. dated 19.5.2005, a copy whereof has been annexed as Annexure - E, to contend that in case of ineligibility for admission in the course, respondents were perfectly justified in cancelling the result of the petitioner.