CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsDivision Bench

Ganesh Mahaseth vs State of Bihar

Patna High Court · Decided on 6 September 2016 · Citation: (2016) 4 PLJR 824

HON’BLE JUDGES
Mr. Hemant Gupta and Mr. Ahsanuddin Amanullah, JJ.
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Letters Patent Appeal No. 2179 of 2015; (Arising out of Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 16756 of 2008)
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

11 paragraphs · 345 words

Mr. Hemant Gupta, J.(Oral) - Re.:I.A. No. 9467 of 2015

The application is for condonation of delay of 70 days in filing the Letters Patent Appeal.

2.

For the reasons mentioned in the Interlocutory Application, we are satisfied that the appellant has shown sufficient cause to seek condonation of delay of 70 days in filing the present Letters Patent Appeal.

3.

Consequently, Interlocutory Application No. 9467 of 2015 is allowed and delay of 70 days in filing the Letters Patent Appeal is condoned.

Re.: L.P.A. No. 2179 of 2015

4.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

5.

The challenge in the present Letters Patent Appeal is to an order passed by the learned Single Bench of this Court on 21st of July, 2015 in C.W.J.C. No. 16756 of 2008 whereby, direction for publication of result for the Sessions 1986-88 and 1987-89 was not entertained for the reason that the Institution from which the appellant is said to have undertaken training has not been granted recognition.

6.

The appellant is said to have obtained training during the Sessions 1986-88 from Noorul Hassan Minority Teacher Training College, Sitamarhi. The said college was not granted recognition. The appellant has obtained training from the said Institution but his result has not been published by the Bihar School Examination Board. Aggrieved against the non-publication of result, the appellant has invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court which has been dismissed.

7.

Similar claim of the students of the same batch was raised in C.W.J.C. No. 3003 of 2006 (Md. Sohail Ahmad v. The State of Bihar ) and vide order dated 28th of August, 2006 such claim has been declined.

8.

In view of the fact that the Institution from where the appellant has obtained training has not been granted recognition, the appellant cannot seek declaration of the result from the Bihar School Examination Board. In fact, the issue of recognition was specifically declined by the State Government on 3rd of September, 2008.

9.

We do not find any merit in the present Letters Patent Appeal. The same is dismissed.