K.C.Agrawal, J. - (1.) Heard counsel for the parties.
(2.) The petitioner appeared at the Intermediate Examination in the year 1978-79 as a private candidate from Municipal Girls' Inter College, Muzaffarnagar. Her roll number was 38257. She was declared to have failed on the ground that she did not appear in drawing first and second papers. The petitioner thereafter filed the present writ petition asserting that she had appeared in these two papers and that the Boards action of not declaring her result on the above noted ground is unjustified. In support of her case the petitioner also filed certificates obtained from the Superintendent of the centre through which she had appeared at the examination. Time was granted to the respondents for filing a counter-affidavit. The counter-affidavit filed was unsatisfactory. Hence on 14th May, 1981, this Court gave further time to the respondent for filing a supplementary counter-affidavit. Although the time granted by this Court on 14th May, 1981, has expired but no supplementary counter-affidavit has been filed.
(3.) We have gone through the writ petition and the counter-affidavit. To us it appears that the petitioners assertion that she had appeared in all the papers offered by her at the Intermediate Examination, cannot be held to be wrong. Counsel for the State, however, stated that her copies and the marks were not available and hence the result of the petitioner could not be announced. Be that as it may more than two years have passed since her appearing at the Intermediate Examination. In view of the evidence brought before us that the petitioner had appeared in drawing first and second papers, we are not prepared to believe the case of the respondent taken to the contrary. Having appeared in all the papers offered by her petitioner was entitled to the declaration of her result. She has already been intimated of the marks obtained by her in oher papers. If her copies and the mark-sheet are not available the board may find out a via-media as a special case for the petitioner. It is not for us to suggest the via-media. We understand that there are some norms laid down by the Board itself for regulating a matter like the present one. The Board is, therefore, directed to consider the case of the petitioner within two weeks and do the needful during this period.;