Minor in Live-In Relationship Deemed 'Child in Need of Care' by High Court, Protection Ordered Under Juvenile Justice Act Cheque Signed, Sealed, and Bounced – No Escape from Liability: Delhi High Court Right to Defend Includes Right to Inspect Documents: Calcutta High Court Overrules Trial Court's Rejection of Inspection Petition Court Cannot Tinker with Finalized Consolidation Scheme Under Section 42: Punjab and Haryana High Court Remarriage During Appeal Period is Risky, But Not Void: Andhra Pradesh High Court State Cannot Sleep Over Its Rights: Supreme Court Criticizes Odisha Government for Delayed Appeals in Pension Dispute “Both Hands Intact” Rule is a Relic of the Past: Supreme Court Grants MBBS Admission to Disabled Student Terminal Benefits and Family Pension Alone Do Not Bar Compassionate Appointment, But Financial Distress Must Be Proven – Supreme Court Cruelty Under Section 498A IPC Is Not Limited to Dowry Harassment: Supreme Court Right to Speedy Trial Cannot Be Defeated by Delay Tactics: Punjab & Haryana High Court Orders Fast-Tracking of Cheque Bounce Case Framing Charges Under Section 193 IPC Without Following Section 340 CrPC is Illegal: Calcutta High Court Doctrine of Part Performance Under Section 53-A TPA Not Applicable Without Proof of Possession: Andhra Pradesh High Court Mere Allegations of False Implication Cannot Override Strong Forensic and Documentary Evidence: Delhi High Court Upholds Conviction in Elderly Woman’s Murder and Robbery Case Applicant Not a Sexual Predator, Relationship Was Consensual: Bombay High Court Grants Bail in POCSO Case Fraudulent Transfers to Evade Creditors Cannot Escape Scrutiny: Punjab & Haryana High Court Restores Execution Petition Gujarat High Court Rules That Contractual Employees Cannot Claim Regularization of Services Serious Charges and Victim’s Suicide Justify Continued Detention: Gauhati High Court Denies Bail in POCSO Case No Permanent Establishment in India, Rejects Notional Income Taxation: Delhi High Court Rules in Favor of Nokia OY Statutory Bail Under NDPS Act Can Be Denied If FSL Report Reaches Court Before Bail Plea": Calcutta High Court Termination After Acquittal is Unjust: Bombay High Court Quashes Dismissal of Shikshan Sevak, Orders 50% Back Wages Denial of MBBS Seat Due to Administrative Lapses is Unacceptable": Andhra Pradesh High Court Awards ₹7 Lakh Compensation to Wronged Student Sessions Court Cannot Reclassify Non-Bailable Offences While Granting Anticipatory Bail: Allahabad High Court

Bihar High Court Condemns Board’s Irresponsible Conduct, Awards Compensation for Erroneous Examination Result”

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a recent judgment, the Bihar High Court came down heavily on the Bihar School Examination Board (BSEB) for its irresponsible conduct in publishing an erroneous Secondary School Examination result, causing significant adverse effects on the petitioner’s life. The Court, presided over by Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, expressed its concern over the inordinate delay in responding to the scrutiny request and awarded compensation to petitioner no. 2 for the mental agony and loss of study time she endured.

The case, bearing Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 7185 of 2019, involved Manoj Kumar and Kanchan Kumari as the petitioners and the State of Bihar through the Principal Secretary Education Department, the Director Primary Education, the Secretary of Bihar School Examination Board, the Registrar of Bihar School Examination Board, and the Headmaster of BLSSP High School Narkatiya as the respondents.

Petitioner no. 2, a student of BLSSP High School, Narkatiya, was shocked when her result was published, indicating that she had failed in the compulsory paper of Sanskrit. However, after an application under the Right to Information Act, it was discovered that she had, in fact, obtained ‘77’ marks in Sanskrit. The delay in providing the correct information, which took over a year and a half, caused petitioner no. 2 to lose two academic years and suffer immense mental agony and humiliation.

Justice Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, in his oral judgment on 19th July 2023, expressed his dismay over the irresponsible conduct of the Board and its officials, which marred the petitioner’s career and future prospects. He further cited a similar judgment from a Co-ordinate Bench, wherein compensation was awarded in a comparable circumstance, to support the decision to award compensation in this case.

The Court directed the Board to pay a sum of Rs. 2 lakhs to petitioner no. 2 as compensation, along with Rs. 25,000/- as litigation cost. Additionally, the Board was given liberty to conduct an inquiry and fix responsibility upon the erring officials. The Court granted the Board the authority to recover the compensation amount from those officials found at fault.

This judgment serves as a stern warning to educational boards and authorities to be diligent in their responsibilities and highlights the importance of accountability in the education system. The Court’s decision to award compensation aims to provide some redressal to petitioner no. 2 for the hardships she endured due to the irresponsible conduct of the Board and its officials.

Justice Rajeev Ranjan Prasad stated, “The action of the Board and its officials in recording an incorrect/wrong marks in the result of the petitioner and showing her ‘Fail’ is a totally irresponsible kind of act which has a huge adverse consequence upon the career and future prospect of petitioner no. 2.”

The Court's decision In this case, as in CWJC No. 6173 of 2018, highlights the significance of ensuring accuracy and promptness in handling examination results, which directly impact the lives and futures of students.

Date of Decision: 19th July 2023

Manoj Kumar vs The State of Bihar

Similar News