Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details


High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


Rao Gajendra Singh Yadav And Others v. State Of U.P. And Others - WRIT - C No. 17413 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 6891 (29 March 2006)


This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).


Court No.7

Civil Misc. Writ No. 17413 of 2006

Rao Gajendra Singh Yadav and others                    Petitioners                                            


State of U.P. and others                                            Respondents.

Hon'ble Rakesh Tiwari, J

           Heard counsel for the parties and perused the record.

              This writ petition has been filed by 17 students of Kanchan Singh Bhooli Devi Maha Vidyalaya, Kanpur Dehat which is affiliated to Sri Chatrapati Sahuji Maharaj University, Kanpur. The Institute imparts education in B.Ed. course. The present petitioners and two other candidates were admitted by the Management to Bachelor of Education course. At the time of filling up of examination form objection was raised by the respondent University against the candidatures of the petitioners, which compelled them to file writ petition no. 59917 of 2005. An  interim order was granted by the Court in that petition directing the students to appear in the examination provisionally.

           It is alleged that the results of all the candidates were declared but the answer sheets were not evaluated by the respondent University.  However, the writ petition was finally allowed by the Court on 12.12.2005 directing the respondents to declare the result of the students. The Respondents University filed special appeal no. 47 of 2006 which was dismissed vide order dated 18.1.2006 by the Division Bench of this Court.  Thereafter the respondents University declared the result of the petitioners in which 10 out of 19 petitioners declared as having failed, 7 having passed in 3rd division, one in second division and one in first division.

The petitioners have come up in this writ petition for quashing their result published by the respondents for Bachelor of Education Examination, 2005. It has also been prayed that a direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents may be issued not to declare the result as having passed the Bachelor of Education Examination in such division and to pass any order or direction which this Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

I am afraid that the result has already been declared. There is no material on record to establish that result is incorrect and requires to be quashed. If this would be done all those students who have passed the examination along with the petitioners would be nowhere. This prayer is wholly misconceived. In case the petitioners are aggrieved by their own result, they may apply for scrutiny or apply for back paper in accordance with rules.

For the reasons stated above, the writ petition is dismissed.

Dated 29.3.2006



Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites


dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.