S.C. Mathu, J. - (1.) The petitioner Raj Kishore Bajpai has sought a writ of mandamus to command the opposite parties to decare the result of his examination and to deliver to him the marks-sheet of the same.
(2.) The petitioner appeared privately at the aforesaid examination in the year 1986. The results were published which did not contain his name The petitioner preferred representations with no result. Thereupon the petitioner preferred the instant petition alleging that the conduct of the opposite-parties was arbitrary.
(3.) No counter-affidavit was filed on behalf of the opposite parties 1 and 3 on whose behalf notice had been accepted by the learned Standing Counsel. The case came up before us on 23rd August, 1988. On that date statement was made by the learned Standing counsel to the effect that the only ground for not declaring the petitioner's result was that his application for appearing at the examination was received beyond the prescribed last date. It was stated that the last date for receipt of application was 12th of October, 1985 but the petitioner's application was received on 15th October, 1985. It was also stated that the petitioner had appeared at the examination on the basis of an interim order obtained from the Court. The case was adjourned and was directed to be put up on 25th August, 1988. It could not be taken upon 25th August and was directed to come up today. Today on all tax together different statement has been a made by the learned counsel for the State, it was conceded that there was no interim order in favour of the petitioner. In other words the admit card was issued to the petitioner in normal course. It was then stated that the petitioner had not deposited the examination fees in time and, therefore, the result was withheld. It was pointed out that the last date for deposit of examination-lee was 12th October, 1985. We are dismayed at the way irresponsible statement was made on behalf of a Public Body like the U.P. High School and Intermediate Board, Allahabad.;