Academic institutions are entitled to rely on their internal databases for verifying academic credentials. A court will not issue a writ compelling an institution to recognize documents that conflict with official records and are reasonably suspected of being forged, absent clear proof of their genuineness.

JUDGMENT :

Partha Sarathi Chatterjee, J.

1. The present appeal challenges the legality and propriety of the order dated 19.06.2025 passed by the learned Single Bench in WPA 11863 of 2025, whereby the writ petition preferred by the writ petitioner/appellant (hereinafter referred to as ‘the appellant’) was dismissed.

2. Briefly stated, the facts, as projected by the appellant in his pleadings, are that the appellant, who was a student of Basirhat College in the District of North 24 Parganas, affiliated to West Bengal State University, completed his B.Sc. (Honours) in Chemistry in the year 2014. He initially received his marksheet dated 4th August, 2014 in respect of the Part-III examination, which reflected that he had been awarded 25 out of 100 and 29 out of 100 in CEMA Papers V and VI respectively.

3. Being dissatisfied with the marks so awarded, the appellant applied for review of the answer scripts of the said papers. Subsequently, a provisional marksheet dated 29.12.2014 was issued indicating that his marks in the said papers had been increased by 7 and 8 marks respectively, raising them to 32 and 37. Thereafter, the appellant received the final marksheet dated 19th April, 2015.

4. For the purpose of pursuing a B.Ed. course from another University, the appellant applied for a migration certificate. Upon verification of all his documents, including the marksheets, the University issued a migration certificate to the appellant on 7th October, 2015, granting him no objection to take admission to any course in another University.

5. In the year 2016, the appellant visited the University to collect his provisional certificate. At that time, the marksheet earlier issued to him was taken from his custody and he was informed that the marks in the said two papers, as reflected in his final marksheet, did not tally with the records maintained by the University. Thereafter, the appellant requested the University to return his original marksheet; however, the University did not accede to such request. Instead, by issuing a certificate, the University stated that the final marksheet submitted by the appellant was under verification and that the provisional certificate could not be issued to him until the verification process was completed.

6. In the meantime, the appellant qualified in the Teacher’s Eligibility Test (for short, ‘TET’) held on 16th August, 2015 and an interview list was published on 23rd August, 2019. However, owing to certain disputes, a writ proceeding was initiated in that regard. Ultimately, a panel was published on 23rd August, 2023, in which the appellant’s name appeared at serial no. 555. Pursuant thereto, the appellant joined Kumarpur Parashmoni Sikshbitan (H.S.) as a teacher on 6th December, 2024. However, approval of his appointment was granted subject to the condition that the appellant would furnish his final marksheet and original pass certificate.

7. On November 9, 2023, the appellant submitted an application under the relevant provisions of Right to Information Act, 2005 (for short, the 2005 Act) requesting information and supply of answer scripts of those two papers along with his post review mark sheet. However, despite receipt of such application, no documents had been supplied to the appellant which prompted the appellant to prefer an appeal under the 2005 Act.

8. Subsequently, by a letter dat