1959 Supreme(MP) 77
High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
Shiv Dayal Shrivastava, A. H. Khan and H. R. Krishnan, JJ.
SHOBHA BHATNAGAR - Appellant
Versus
STATE - Respondents
Civil Misc. Petn. 7 Of 1959
Decided On : 03/16/1959
Harihar Nivas Divedi, T.S.MONGRE
The meaning of "failed to obtain promotion" and "who has been detained" in Regulation 5 of Chapter XIII of the Regulations of the Board of Secondary Education, Madhya Bharat Region.
Headnote:
INTERMEDIATE EXAMINATION - PRIVATE CANDIDATE - DISQUALIFICATION - DETENTION IN CLASS XI - MEANING OF - INTERPRETATION OF REGULATION 5 OF CHAPTER XIII OF THE REGULATIONS OF THE BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION, MADHYA BHARAT REGION - HELD, THAT A CANDIDATE WHO LEFT THE COLLEGE IN THE MIDDLE OF THE SESSION WITHOUT TAKING THE PROMOTION EXAMINATION IS NOT ONE WHO HAS "FAILED TO OBTAIN PROMOTION" OR "WHO HAS BEEN DETAINED".
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a private candidate, was refused permission to sit for the Intermediate Examination to be held in March, 1959 by the M. B. Board of Secondary Education on the ground that she was disqualified under Regulation 5 of Chapter XIII of the statutory regulations of the Board, which provides that "private candidates who have failed to obtain promotion to the highest class of any school or Intermediate College (i. e. those who have been detained in Class IX or Class XI) shall not be admitted to the next ensuing High School or Intermediate Examination respectively."
Finding of the Court:
The Court held that the petitioner was not disqualified from appearing at the Intermediate Arts Examination of 1959 and the Board was found to be not performing its public duty in refusing to examine her.
Issues: Whether a candidate who left the college in the middle of the session without taking the promotion examination is one who has "failed to obtain promotion" or "who has been detained".
Ratio Decidendi: The Court interpreted Regulation 5 of Chapter XIII of the Regulations of the Board of Secondary Education, Madhya Bharat Region, and held that the expression "failed to obtain promotion" is synonymous with "being detained". The Court further held that a candidate who left the college in the middle of the session without taking the promotion examination is not one who has "failed to obtain promotion" or "who has been detained".
Final Decision: The Court issued a writ of mandamus directing the respondent Board to act according to law, treating the petitioner as not disqualified from appearing at the intermediate Arts Examination of 1959.
( 1 ) THIS is an application under Article 226 of ihe Constitution by a private candidate for the Intermediate Examination to bo held in March, 1959 by the M. B. Board of Secondary Education. The Board has got full discretion in allowing or disallowing any private candidate to take the examination. But actually, this candidate has been refused permission to sit for the examination on the ground that she was disqualified under Reg, 5 in Chapter XIII of the statutory regulations of the Board :
"private candidtates who have failed to obtain promotion to the highest class of any school or Intermediate College (i. e. those who have been detained in Class IX or Class XI) shall not bo admitted to the next ensuing High School or Intermediate Examination respectively. Every year in the beginning of the session, the Heads of institutions recognised by the Board shall send to the Secretary of the Board a list of students, who have been detained in Class IX and Class XI containing the student's name, his age, his father's name, place of residence and guardian's name. "
The petitioner avers that but for this disqualification the Board would have permitted her and that this disqualification is based on a misapplication of the rule which really does not exclude her. Accordingly, she has prayed that the Board should be directed to permit her to sit for the examination and advised that the rule does not apply to her in the circumstances set out in the application and to be examined presently.
( 2 ) JUST before the hearing, a petition was moved making fresh averments of fact, but I shall examine them towards the end. The Board is a statutory Board acting under Regulations which have been made under a statute, and as such it is amenable to this Court's direction in the event of a finding that it has committed a mistake in interpreting or applying a regulation. If, on the contrary, the interpretation put by the Board is a correct one, or at least one of two equally plausible views, this Court would not interfere by thrusting its opinion on a statutory body.
( 3 ) THE petitioner joined one of the approved colleges in March, 1957 in what is ealled the 1st Year or Class XI. It was the session preceding the one at the end of which is held the examination in which she wants permission to appear. She did not complete the academic year, but left in October, 1957. The reason was that her father was transferred from Gwalior. Nor could ihe petitioner join a college at the new station Mandleshwar which does not have a college at all. After about a year she sent on her application to the Board for the examination of March, 1959 and was told that she had studied in an approved college namely "kamla Raja", and failed to secure promotion to the next year, in other words, had been 'detained' in class XI, which is also called the 1st year Intermediate. After some correspondence between the petitioner's father and the Board she filed the present application, in the end of January 1959
( 4 ) THE only question is whether a candidate leaving in the middle of the session, without taking the promotion examination that is usually held at the end of the session, is one who has "failed to secure promotion" or "who has been detained. " this question has been argued at such a considerable length and elaborateness that is quite out of proportion to its simplicity. The phrase in the brackets is, as it were, an explanation of "failed to obtain promotion. " It does happen often that an explanation is not co-extensive with what it seeks to explain, but that is not the position here. Failing to obtain promotion is, in my opinion, synonymous with being detained. In fact, "promotion" according to the dictionary (O. E. D.) is going farther or beyond, while "detention" is being stopped from going beyond. The fact that the petitioner obtained a transfer certificate and was, in fact, entitled to a transfer certificate makes no difference, because detention' is with refe