LI Network
Published on: 23 July 2023 at 12:30 IST
The Patna High Court held the Board responsible and deplorable for wrongly declaring Petitioner no. 2 as ‘fail’ in her Compulsory Sanskrit Exam, despite her actual score being 77 marks.
The Court found the Board’s actions to have caused mental agony and humiliation to the petitioner and consequently ordered the Respondents to pay a compensation of Rs. 2 Lakh. The case was presided over by Justice Rajeev Ranjan Prasad.
During the proceedings, the Court took note of the arguments presented by the counsel for both the petitioners and the Board, as well as the State.
The Court expressed no difficulty in concluding that the Board’s act of recording incorrect marks in the petitioner’s result and declaring her as ‘fail’ was highly irresponsible.
This negligence had severe adverse consequences on the petitioner’s career and future prospects.
The Court further noted that immediately after the erroneous result was published, the petitioner had applied for scrutiny, accompanied by the requisite fee. However, the Board failed to attend to the matter in a timely manner, taking approximately one year and eight months to rectify the mistake.
Advocate Indira Kumari represented the petitioner, while Advocate Hitesh Suman appeared for the State, and Advocate Ajay Kumar represented the Board.
In this particular case, Petitioner no. 2 had been incorrectly marked as ‘fail’ in her Compulsory Sanskrit Exam during her SSE (Secondary School Examination). Consequently, she sought recourse under the Right to Information Act. After an extensive delay of one and a half years, the Board finally notified Petitioner no. 2 of her actual score of ’77’ in the Compulsory Sanskrit Exam. The petitioner contended that this unjust delay had significantly affected her future prospects and career.
The Court vehemently condemned the Board’s actions, stating that recording wrong marks in the petitioner’s result was unacceptable and irresponsible. Additionally, the Board’s failure to rectify the error in a reasonable time led to mental agony and humiliation for Petitioner no. 2. The Court expressed strong disapproval and condemnation of the Board’s authorities for their highly deplorable conduct.
The Court cited the case of Saurabh Kumar v. The State of Bihar and Ors. (CWJC No. 6173 of 2018) as a basis for its ruling and directed the Board to compensate Petitioner no. 2 with Rs. 2 Lakh as well as reimburse Rs. 25,000 as the cost of litigation.
The Court took into consideration the fact that the petitioner was a female student who had indeed passed her matriculation examination in the first division. However, due to the Board’s irresponsible actions, she suffered significant setbacks in her life, losing valuable time for studies that could not be adequately compensated.
Hence, the Court ordered the Board to pay the aforementioned compensation and costs. The Writ Petition was granted accordingly.
