Court No. - 3
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 2653 of 2019
Petitioner :- Virendra Yadav
Respondent :- State Of U P And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Om Prakash Singh Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Ajay Bhanot,J.
1. The petitioner had applied for nomination as Examination Center to conduct the High School and Intermediate Examination conducted by the respondent- Board. The enlistment of educational institutions as examination centers to hold the high school and intermediate examination is governed and regulated by the Government Order dated 16.10.2018. The Government Order provides the time-line, designates authorities and prescribes the procedure for submission and processing of such applications.
2. The application for enlistment of the Institutions as examination centers has to be submitted online on 25.10.2018. The representations containing objections or complaints regarding the notified list of examination centers are to be submitted online on 05.11.2018.
3. The relevant provisions of the Government Order are extracted hereunder:
क. प्रधधानधाचधारर्यो तथधा जजिलधा वविदधालर वनररीक्षक दधारधा अपललोड एविवं प्रमधावणित ककी गररी आधधारभभूत सभूचनधाओवं कके आधधार पर ऑनलधाइन चरवनत पररीक्षधा कके न्दलो (वविदधालर छधात्र आविवंटन आविवंटन सवहित) कधा वनधधार्धारणि एविवं जजिलधाजधकधाररी ककी अध्रक्षरतधा मम गवठित जिनपदरीर सवमवत कके अविललोकनधाथर्धा तथधा पररक्षणि हिकेततु पररषदद ककी विकेबसधाइट पर अपललोड करनके ककी वतजथ । 25 अक्टभू बर 2015 ख. पररषदद ककी विकेबसधाइट पतुर अपललोड ककी गररी वविदधालर कके आविवंटन सवहित कम द वनधधार्धारणि सभूचरी कलो प्रधधानधाचधारर्यो कके सम्रक पररक्षणि हिकेततु जजिलधा वविदधालर वनररीक्षककों दधारधा अपनके जिनपदकों मम समधाचधार पत्रकों कके मधाध्रम सके वविज्ञवप्ति प्रकधावशित करधाकर वविदधालरकों ककी आपजत्तिरर्यो / वशिकधारतकों कके सम्बवंजधत प्रवतविकेदन कलो ऑनलधाइन प्रधाप्ति करनके ककी वतजथ। 05 नविवंबर 2018 ग. जिनपदरीर सवमवत दधारधा प्रधधानधाचधारर्यो सके प्रधाप्ति आपवतरलो कधा सम्रक पररीक्षणि करनधा , तथधा आपजत्तिरकों कके तधावकर्धा क एविवं औवचत्रपभूणिर्धा पधाए जिधानके पर उन पर अवंवतम कधारर्धाविधाहिरी करनके हिकेततु जिनपदरीर सवमवत सके अनतुमलोवदत आख्रधा /सवंस्ततुवत अलग सके पररषदद ककी विकेबसधाइट पर हिरी ऑनलधाइन अग्रसररत करनके ककी वतजथ। 20 नविवंबर 2018 घ. पररषदद ककी विकेबसधाइट पर ऑनलधाइन प्रधाप्ति तधावकर्धा क एविवं औवचत्रपभूणिर्धा अभ्रवक्ति सवहित जिनपदरीर सवमवत सके अनतुमलोवदत आख्रधा /सवंस्ततुवत कलो जजिलधा वविदधालर वनररीक्षक दधारधा सवंशिलोजधत एविवं प्रधामधावणिक आधधारभभूत सभूचनधाओ कके दृवष्टिगत पररषदद ककी कम टट वनधधार्धारणि सवमवत दधारधा आपजत्तिरकों कधा पररीक्षणि एविवं वनरधाकरणि करनधा एविवं कम द वनधधार्धारणि सभूचरी कलो अवंवतम रूप प्रदधान कर उसके विकेबसधाइट पर सविर्धासम्बनन्धत कके सभूचनधाथर्धा अपललोड करनधा। 30 नविवंबर 2018
4. The institutions also have a remedy of by approaching the Secretary, Madhyamik Shiksha Parishad, U.P. Allahabad, Director of Education (Madhyamik) and Chairman, Madhyamik Shiksha Parishad, U.P. Lucknow and Additional Chief Secretary (Madhyamik Shiksha) U.P. Lucknow within a period of five days of the rejection of their claim. The relevant provision is reproduced below for ease of reference:-
"पररषदद कधारधार्धालर दधारधा ऑनलधाइन वनधधार्धाररत करधारके गए पररीक्षधा कम दकों कके सम्बन्ध मम प्रधधानधाचधारर्योवं सके प्रधाप्ति प्रत्रधाविकेदन /आपजत्तिरकों कके वनरधाकरणि वविषरक जिनपदरीर सवमवत दधारधा प्रकेवषत तथ्रपरक अभ्रवक्ति, रवक्तिरक्ति कधारणिकों / सधाक्ष्रकों सवहित अनतुमलोदलोनलोपरधावंत ऑनलधाइन अग्रसधाररत आख्रधा क वनरधाकरणि कके बधाद पररीक्षधा कम दकों कके सम्बन्ध मम रवद वकसरी सवंस्थधा कके छधात्र @अवभभधाविक@प्रधधानधाचधारर्धा @प्रबवंधक कलो आपजत्ति @वशिकधारत हिलो तलो इस सम्बन्ध मम रवक्तिरक्तितु कधारणिकों @सधाक्ष्रकों सवहित अपनधा प्रत्रधाविकेदन सवचवि ] मधाध्रवमक वशिक्षधा पररषदद ] उत्तिर प्रदकेशि इलधाहिधाबधाद वशिक्षधा वनदकेशिक ] मधाध्रवमक एविवं सभधापवत ] मधाध्रवमक वशिक्षधा पररषदद उत्तिर प्रदकेशि लखनऊ तथधा अपर मख्र सवचवि] मधाध्रवमक वशिक्षधा उत्तिर प्रदकेशि शिधाशिन] लखनऊ कलो पधावंच वदविस कके अवंदर अपनधा प्रत्रधाविकेदन प्रस्ततुत करगम के ऐसके प्रत्रविकेदनलो पर अवंवतम वनणिर्धार पररषदरीर कम द वनधधार्धारणि सवमवत दधार जलरधा जिधारकेगधा ।"
5. The time-line and the procedure provided in the Government Order dated 16.10.2018 for enlistment of the Examination Centres has to be adhered to strictly. In case, the permission to relax the aforesaid time-line is granted or deviation from procedure is condoned, it will create uncertainty in the selection of the Examination Centres. This will ultimately cause a dis-array in the examination schedule itself. Since the future academic careers of a large number of students is at stake, the imperative of public interest demands that there should be inflexible adherence to the time-line and the procedure provided in the Government Order dated 16.10.2018.
6. The Government Order, thus, provides for a comprehensive chain of designated authorities, prescribed procedure and fixed time lines to submit applications and entertain objections regarding nomination of Institutions as examination centres to hold the Intermediate and High School examination for the year 2019.
7. The petitioner's Institution was not enlisted as an examination centre to conduct the Intermediate and High School examination in the year 2019. The petitioner raised an objection against the non-enlistment as an examination centre.
8. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there was no necessity for submitting any objection to the non- enlistment of the institution as an examination centre. Since the name of the institution was enlisted in the provisional list. The contention is misconceived. There are specific provision in the Government Order dated 16.10.2018 for filing objections against non enlistment. Admittedly, the petitioner has not approached the competent authority in accordance with prescribed procedure and fixed time lines provided in the Government Order dated 16.10.2018 for redressal of his grievances.
9. The Court, thus, finds that the petitioner has not submitted any application under the aforesaid Government Order to the competent authority in the prescribed time period and in the prescribed format, against non enlistment as an examination centre. The said failure of the petitioner to abide by the provisions of the Government Order invalidates the claim for any relief from this Court. The petitioner cannot be permitted to act contrary to the mandatory provisions/Government Order dated 16.10.2018.
10. The Court cannot issue directions to decide the representation which has been made in violation of the scheme of the Government Order dated 16.10.2018. Such directions would negate the whole scheme of the Government Order dated 16.10.2018.
11. Moreover, a Division Bench of this Court in Special Appeal No. 19 of 2019, Adarsh Shiksha Mandir Inter College vs. State of U.P. and Others by judgment and order dated 08.01.2019 has also held that failure to apply within the time period prescribed in the Government Order is fatal to the cause of the applicant institution. Further, the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Adarsh Shiksha (supra) has also opined that an educational institution has no vested right to be enlisted as an examination centre. The relevant part of the judgment is being extracted hereunder for ease of reference:
"The petitioner-appellant had filed writ petition seeking a direction for selecting its College as an examination centre for U.P. Board Examination 2019. The writ petition was dismissed holding that the petitioner-appellant failed to apply within time prescribed.
The submission of Sri R.K. Ojha, learned counsel for the appellant is that according to the press notification issued by the District Inspector of Schools itself on 6.11.2018, the objections were invited by 17.11.2018 whereas the petitioner-appellant has filed its objection on 12.11.2018 but the same has not been considered.
The aforesaid press notification is altogether in a different context and is not with regard to inviting applications for enlistment of the institutions as an examination centre.
The said press notification refers to the list of examination centres as published by the District Inspector of Schools and invites objections from the principals of the institutions against the selection of the aforesaid centres. The petitioner-appellant was not enlisted as a centre therein.
Even otherwise, the petitioner-appellant has no vested right to be enlisted as an examination centre."
12. The view taken by the learned Division Bench of this Court in the case of Adarsh Shiksha (supra) is consistent with the pronouncements relating to the nature of right of an institution to be enlisted as an examination centre.
13. A Division Bench of this Court in the case of C/M, Shaheed Mangal Pandey Inter College, Meerut and others Vs. State of U.P. and others in Special Appeal No.118 of 2011 held thus:
"Definitely an institution has a right to impart education but right to be an examination centre cannot be an available right to the Institution."
14. The writ petition is misconceived and is accordingly dismissed.
Order Date :- 24.1.2019 Dhananjai