Vikas Shridhar Sirpurkar, CJ. - (1.) This judgment will dispose of all the above appeals. All these appeals are filed on behalf of the West Bengal Council of Higher Secondary Education (hereinafter referred to as Council) challenging the interim/final orders of the learned Single Judges passed in the writ petitions, petitioners whereof are either the students or their parents. Basic facts and the question involved being all common in nature we are disposing of the appeals by this common order though we propose to deal with each appeal after the common points are dealt with.
(2.) All the writ petitioners are the students, or as the case may be the wards of the writ petitioners, are desirous of appearing in the Higher Secondary Education (10+2) examination alleged to be held in March, 2006. All of them were late in filling up their enrolment forms for the examination and therefore the same were not accepted by the Council. Hence all the petitioners rushed to this Court whereupon the learned Single Judges have passed interim/final orders directing the Council to accept their enrolment form along with late fees and other fees and to permit them to appear for the Higher Secondary Examination 2006. Mainly stated, all the writ petitioners pleaded that they had some genuine difficulties and hence they could not fill up the form in time. The learned Single Judge has accepted the cases pleaded by the writ petitioners and has permitted them to appear in the Higher Secondary Examination, 2006. These orders have been challenged herein by the Council.
(3.) The learned Counsel for the appellant Mr. Bimal Chatterjee assisted by Mr. R. Chatterjee, urged before us that the relevant regulations did not permit any condonation of delay in tendering the enrolment forms along with the fees. According to the learned Counsel the language of Regulation 6(3) of Examination Regulations was clear and mandatory in nature. The learned Counsel further argued that even if such powers were to be found that the Council to ignore the delay, even then on facts the petitioners were not able to give any convincing reason as regards the delay. The learned Counsel was at pains to point out that in terms of the Supreme Court decision in the case of Murli Dhar&Anr. v. Union of India & Ors., reported in 2005(2) SCC 65 it is imperative for the Council to declare the results of the Higher Secondary Examination before 10th June of every year and therefore it may not be possible for the Council to accommodate the petitioners as the Council has to make a huge preparations for the examination wherein about 5 lakh students appear every year.;