Importance of maintaining the sanctity of law and education in disputes involving recognition and examination of students.

Dipak Misra, J.

1. Occasions do arise in certain cases where the litigants try to take advantage of certain situations by seeking withdrawal of the application which they have moved seeking certain reliefs. But when the attempt is quite adroit and the intention is not sanguine and the effort is made to frustrate the cause of justice and to have an advantage because of withdrawal, the Courts are under an obligation not to grant permission to withdraw. A litigant cannot visit the Court as if it is a laboratory. He cannot endeavour to play a game of Chess. He cannot be permitted to box the compass. The purpose of saying so is that when the case was called the learned counsel for the petitioner stood up and sought permission seeking withdrawal of the case but as the factual matrix exposits a different scenario altogether which requires adjudication the sacrosanctity of law has to be saved. In that backdrop, this Court thought it apposite not to grant leave to withdraw the writ petition. The pristine purity of law has to be maintained and no one should be allowed to spoil the alter of the temple. Hence, the matter was taken up and heard on merits.

2. Invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India the petitioner has prayed for issue of a writ of certiorari for quashment of impugned order dated 2-3-2001, Annexure-P-1, and further to issue a writ of mandamus commanding the respondent No. 1, Secretary, Board of Secondary Education (hereinafter referred to as "the Board"), to conduct a supplementary examination in the month of August, 2001. There is a further prayer to issue a direction to the respondent No. 1, the Board, to allow the students of the petitioner's school to appear as regular candidates.

3. The facts as have been depicted in the writ petition are that the petitioner, Anant Prasad Pandey, is running a school in the name of Seva Dal Higher Secondary School Akauria. The said school is run by a Society which has been registered under the Madhya Pradesh Societies Registrikaran Adhiniyam, 1973. The said school has been running since 5th July, 1989 and number of students have taken admission in the said institution and prosecuting their studies. It has been averred that in the year 2001 the petitioner had submitted an application to the Board for the extension of recognition and the Board had granted recognition to the said institution for the year 2001 and a code was allotted to it. The recognition certificate and the allotment code have been brought on record as Annexure-P-3. According to the writ petitioner, as per the instructions and the resolution of the Board the petitioner had given admission to 350 students in the month of July, 2000. They were regularly prosecuting their studies from July, 2000 till the month of February, 2001. The students had deposited the examination fees and roll numbers had also been issued to them and they had appeared in the practical examination also from the said school as regular candidates. Copy of the report of the practical examination has been brought on record as Annexure-P-4. The petitioner had also deposited the requisite fee which was prescribed by the Board. It has been putforth that a list of 350 students who had taken admission in the institution was forwarded to the Board vide Annexure-P-7 as regular candidates and accordingly roll numbers were allotted. While the matter stood thus, it has been alleged, that the Board sent a letter dated 3-3-2001 to the petitioner indicating that 299 students of the school were not regular candidates because their names had not been mentioned in the admission list. Copy of the letter sent by the Board has been brought on record as Annexure-P-8.

4. It is averred in the writ petition that 350 students had already taken admission in the month of July, 2000 and the list of the same had been sent to the Board in accordance with the rules in vogue and when the Board had communicated the rol