High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Case Law Search
Km. Nidhi Wahal v. State Of U.P. Through Secfy. Ministry Secondary Education - WRIT - C No. 1276 of 1999  RD-AH 7379 (23 April 2007)
Civil Misc. Writ Petition no.1276 of 1999
Km. Nidhi Wahal vs. The State of U.P. and others
Heard learned counsel for the parties. Petitioner passed secondary school examination (equivalent to 10th standard) in the year 1991 from National Open School Delhi with four subjects i.e. Hindi, Science, Economics and Home Science. Thereafter in the year 1997 petitioner submitted form to appear as private student for intermediate examination conducted by respondent no.3 - Madhyamic Shikcha Parishad U.P. Allahabad. The form was submitted through Principal of respondent no.4 Poorna Devi Khanna Girls Inter College, Ashok Nagar, Kanpur. Petitioner was permitted to appear in the examination but she could not pass. In the next year i.e. 1998 also petitioner filled up his form in the same manner as in the year 1997. Petitioner appeared in the examination however, her result was not declared. Through this writ petition it has been prayed that Madhyamic Shikcha Parishad be directed to declare petitioner's result.
In the counter affidavit it has been stated that on receipt of petitioner's form for 1998 Intermediate Examination, scrutiny was made and it was found that petitioner was not qualified to appear in the examination as she had not passed High School or equivalent examination. It has further been stated in paragraph no.7 of the counter affidavit that according to the relevant rules and regulations a student who has passed secondary school examination from National Open School, Delhi is qualified to appear in the Intermediate examination if he or she has passed the secondary school examination with six subjects. The petitioner had passed the said examination with only four subjects hence certificate obtained by her was not equivalent to High School examination. It has further been stated that form of the petitioner for the examination of 1998 had been cancelled by respondent no.3 hence she should not have appeared in the examination.
The main argument of learned counsel for the petitioner is that as for the year 1997 petitioner was permitted to appear in the examination and her result was also declared in which she failed hence respondents are estopped from questioning the minimum qualification of the petitioner to appear in the intermediate examination. The argument cannot be accepted. If a student has not passed High School examination or equivalent examination then she cannot be permitted to appear in the examination of intermediate. Merely because petitioner was permitted to appear in the examination of 1997 and failed result was declared by the Board, it cannot operate as estoppel. In case petitioner had passed the examination of 1997 and thereafter had appeared and passed subsequent examination of the higher class also then question of estoppel could be considered. It has clearly been stated in para-6 of the counter affidavit that as petitioner did not submit the original certificate of high school examination before the Madhyamic Shiksha Parishad hence her candidature had been cancelled for the intermediate examination of 1998. If inspite of cancellation of candidature petitioner appeared in the examination hence she cannot place reliance upon the doctrine of estoppel.
Accordingly, there is no merit in the writ petition hence it is dismissed.
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.