Rohan Malhan vs State Of H.P. & Others

Anoop Chitkara, J

The petitioner, who studied in the institution of third respondent and passed his matriculation, has come up before this Court on the ground that the

respondents are not considering his matric certificate as valid because the affiliation of the institute has been withdrawn by the second respondent at

the time when the petitioner had passed the examination.

Mr. Vinod Chauhan, learned counsel representing the respondent-Board, submits that he has received instructions that the similarly placed persons

were permitted by this Court in CWP No.849 of 2019, titled Priyanka Devi versus State of H.P. & Others and other decision following this judgment,

and he has no objection in case the similar relief is given to the petitioner herein, on the ground of parity.

I have perused the judgment passed in Priyanka Devi’s case supra and find no reason to take a different view as taken by the Coordinate

Bench of this Court.

Given above, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider the matriculation certificate of the petitioner, Annexure

P-1, issued by the third respondent, as valid only for the purpose to pursue his further studies based upon the said certificate. It is made clear that the

observations made are only with respect to seeking further higher studies and not for other purposes. Pending application(s), if any, are closed.