- (1.) It is yet another case where Petitioner in seeking relief for expending matter of scrutiny pending with the Respondents.
(2.) This Court takes judicial notice of the fact that large number of students have submitted their application forms praying for scrutiny as contemplated under relevant regulations framed by the Board of High School & Intermediate Education, U.P., Allhabad (for short called Board). Instead of applying its mind to individual cases, this court feels that matters pertaining to scrutiny should be decided at the earliest possible and Board should be decided at the earliest possible and Board should not, by delay at its end, compel students and guardians to run to High Court.
(3.) It is to be appreciated that parties who failed to approach the Court cannot be ignored. So all the parties, whether they have knocked the door of the Court or not, to be granted relief. It cannot be said that benefit be given to only those who are before Court. Similarly circumstanced persons and who have not approached the Court may be waiting in the wings would also be entitled to be given similar relief against the State which is under statutory obligation to accord equal treatment as otherwise it may be guilty of discriminatory or arbitrary treatment which cannot be countenanced under Articles 14 and 16, Constitution of India as held in (1997) 2SCC1 (Paragraph 18) (Ashwani Kumar versus State of Bihar), AIR 1979 SC 765 (766) (Paragraphs 40 to 45) (State of Kerala Versus Kumari T.P. Roshana) and 1982 U.P. Local Bodies and Educational Cases 480, (Paragraph 5 and 7) Sneh Deep Versus State of U.P. and others).;