SECRETARY BOARD OF INTERMEDIATE EDUCATION Vs. M SURESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The complainant is student. His allegation is that he paid the fee and when his name was not found in the C. N. R. on a representation made by him the Superintendent of the examination i. e. the Principal issued a separate registration number and he sat for the Intermediate II year examination in March, 1992. But he was not issued with any pass certificate and he was also not communicated the memo of marks. But when he wanted to appear for the supplemental examination in October, 1992, the 1st Opposite Party did not permit him to appear for the examination on the ground that he has to pay some penalty and additional amount. He, therefore, filed the complaint to direct the Opposite Party to deliver the marks list and also to publish his result and to pay Rs.50,000/- towards damages.

(2.) The first Opposite Party opposed the application mainly on the ground that they have not received from the Principal the amount paid by the complainant for appearing for the II year intermediate examination and his name was also not included by the Principal in the list of candidates sent by him and therefore his name was not included in C. N. R. pertaining to 1992 March examination. Since his name was not found in the C. N. R. , it must be deemed that he has not appeared for the examination and question of issuing a pass certificate and communicating the result does not arise. It is also their contention that he has to pay Rs.75/- to- wards examination fee and Rs.300/- as penal fee as per Board rules and as the said sum was not paid, the result of the complainant was withheld.

(3.) The second Opposite Party in his version stated that the student paid the fee and due to typographical mistake of the clerk the complainant's name was not included in the list sent to the intermediate board of the eligible candidates of that centre. Since the complainant has paid the fee according to the regulations he issued a registration number and the complainant was permitted to appear for the examination. It is his further case that after the completion of the examination in March, 1992 he wrote to the Intermediate Board in April, 1992 informing them that the complainant paid the amount towards fee and appeared for the examination with registration number and that his paper may be valued and the results be communicated. But he did not receive any communication from the Intermediate Board. It is, therefore, his submission that due to mistake the name of the complainant was not included in the list but he subsequently requested the first Opposite Party to correct the mistake in April, 1992 itself.