Judgment:
S.K. Katriar, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. According to the writ petition, the petitioner obtained admission to the course of Master of Business Administration in L.N. Mithila Institute of Economic Development and Social Change, (hereinafter referred to as the 'Institute') for the session 1991-93. She was prior thereto student of the Patna University, and was required to submit her migration certificate with the present Institute at the time of admission. It is further stated in the writ petition that she was unable to submit her migration certificate because of the on going strike in the Patna University. In view of her undertaking to submit the same soon after the strike was called off, the petitioner was provisionally admitted. She thereafter submitted the migration certificate and the prescribed fee. The examination took place in October, 1993, and provisional mark sheet was issued to her on 15.1.2001 (Annexure 3), but mark sheet and the certificate in original were not issued by the Magadh University inspite of persistent efforts. Hence this writ petition with the prayer for a direction to the respondents to issue the final mark sheet and certificate in original and also for suitable compensation in view of the delay caused in the matter.
3. The Institute and the University have placed on record separate counter affidavits.
4. I have perused the materials on record and considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. It appears to me that the Institute had admitted the petitioner to the course in question. She was unable to submit the migration certificate because of the on going strike in the Patna University. She had, therefore, submitted her application on 28.8.1991 (Annexure A) to the Institute, requesting therein that she may be provisionally admitted on her undertaking that she will submit the migration certificate after the strike was over, she submitted her migration certificate issued by the Patna University alongwith the registration fee on 31.7.1992. The Institute had forwarded the same to the University alongwith the forwarding letter dated 15.6.1993, for the purpose of her registration as a student of the University. The examination was held in October, 1993, and the result was published soon thereafter which she passed in first class. It further appears to me that the University sat over the matter to the utter helplessness of the petitioner as well as the Institute. The University ultimately issued the registration slip of six students including the petitioner of the batches 1990-92 and 1991 -93, and was conveyed to the Institute by the University's letter dated 10.12.03 (Annexure F). The petitioner was allotted registration No. 13734/91/02. The mark sheet and the provisional certificate have been issued on 27.2.2004. Learned counsel for the parties submit in one voice that the petitioner has received the original certificate on 30.6.2005.
5. In view of the foregoing, it is manifest that the delay in submission of the migration certificate at the time of admission was for circumstances beyond the petitioner's control i.e. due to the on-going strike in the Patna University. She deposited the migration certificate alongwith prescribed fee soon thereafter, which was forwarded by the Institute to the University on 15.6.1993 much before the examination took place in October 1993, the University allotted the registration number on 10.12.2003, and issued the certificate in original on 30.6.2005. The long lapse of a little less than twelve years in issuing the original certificate is entirely attributable to the University and is absolutely unexplained. The inordinate delay, the callous approach, and the inaction on the part of the University is writ large on the face of it. It is very easy to visualise the helplessness and agony of the petitioner. She has lost 12 valuable years of her life. She may have been deprived of service in the meanwhile, or admission to a higher course, or registration for Ph.D. etc. In fact, the petitioner's career could not commence at all on account of the most unjustifiable inaction on the part of the University and may be faced with the situation of age bar at many places, i.g. teaching assignment so suited to women.
6. This takes me on to the question of payment of compensation to the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied on the judgment of a learned Single Judge of the Jharkhand High Court, reported in AIR 2002 page 46 Md. Obaidllah v. Bihar Intermediate Education Counsel and Ors.. The petitioner was declared failed showing him absent for one of the papers though he had in fact appeared. The Intermediate Council accepted the mistake in its counter affidavit but did not state any reason for it and published the result two years late. The Jharkhand High Court held that due to the mistake and gross negligence of the Council, the petitioner suffered irreparable loss by becoming two years late in the academic session and future career. Therefore, the Council was directed to pay him compensation of Rs. 50.000/-. Paragraph 5 of the Judgment is set out herein below for the facility of quite reference :
Paragraph 5 :
'It has not been disputed that due to gross negligence of the respondents, the petitioner not only became late by two academic Sessions but he has been pushed two years back in the entire future career of his life. The petitioner, therefore, suffered serious loss and irreparable injury which cannot be compensated in terms of money. However, for the gross laches and negligence of the respondents, they are liable to be imposed compensatory cost and/or compensation to meet the ends of justice. I, therefore, direct the respondenta to pay a sum of Rs. 50,000/- (fifty thousand) to the petitioner within one month from today. The application stands disposed of.'
Delay of two years led to compensation amounting to Rs. 50.000/-, whereas delay of nearly 12 years has taken place in the present case as a result of which the petitioner' career could not commence at all, an irreparable injury she will suffer for her whole life and she cannot be compensated in terms of money. Learned counsel for the petitioner makes claim of compensation of a modest sum of five lacs. I have no hesitation in granting the same. The Vice-Chancellor of the Magadh University is directed to ensure payment of the said amount alongwith interest at the rate of 5 per cent with effect from July, 1994, within three months from today.
7. The institute also cannot absolve itself of the responsibility in the matter. There is no material on record to show that it took steps in pursuing the matter with the University.
8. In case of a vacancy either with the University or the Institute, the petitioner shall be entitled to consideration in accordance with law and the age bar would be relaxed.
9. The Vice-Chancellor, Magadh University, should immediately institute an enquiry, fix responsibility for the delay in the petitioner's registration and issuance of mark sheet; and certificate in original and take action in accordance with law. It goes without saying that it will be open to the University to realise the aforesaid amount of compensation from the officers/employees of the Magadh University.
10. Before I part with the records, I cannot help observing that, it appears on the basis of the pattern of litigations coming up before this Court, that Magadh University seems to be in the abyss of despair and needs close and prompt attention of the Chancellor of Universities and the Government of Bihar.
11. The writ petition is accordingly allowed. Let copies of this order be handed over to the learned Advocate General and Mr. Shivendra Kishore, the learned counsel who usually appears for the Chancellor of the Universities of Bihar.