LexaceLexace Ask the AI ›
⚖️ Ask the AI about your situation:🚗 Car Accident💼 Work / Job🏠 Housing / Eviction👪 Family / Divorce📋 Contract Dispute💰 Money Owed

CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION versus NIKHIL GULATI AND ANR.

Citation: [1998] 1 S.C.R. 897 · Decided: 13-02-1998 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: M.M. PUNCHHI, B.N. KIRPAL, M. SRINIVASAN · Disposal: Dismissed

Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case

Judgment (excerpt)

-
.r 
CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION 
A 
v. 
NIKHIL GULA TI AND ANR. 
FEBRUARY 13, 1998 
[M.M. PUNCHHI, CJI, B.N. KIRPAL AND M. SRINIVASAN, JJ.] 
B 
Education-In eligible students-Permission to undertake examinations 
under Court orders-Deprecation of-Instance of such aberrations should 
not be treated as a precedent-Such casual directions by Court is abuse of C 
process-Unless justified High Court should desid from making such orders-
He/d no interference was called for under Article 136. 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Special Leave Petition (c) No. 
18853/1997. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 4.9.97 of the Rajasthan High Court 
in DBCSA 1181 of1997. 
T.C. Sharma, Neelam Shanna, Mr. Ajay Shanna and Mr. Rupesh Kumar 
for the Petitioner. 
S. K. Jain and Mr.AP. Dhamija for the Respondents. 
The following Order of the Court was delivered : 
D 
E 
Occasional aberrations such as these, whereby ineligible students are F 
permitted, under court orders, to undertake Board and/or University 
examinations, have caught the attention of this Court many a time. To add to 
it further, the courts have almost always observed that the instance of such 
aberrations should not be treated as a precedent in future. Such casual 
discretions by the Court is nothing but an abuse of the process; more so 
when the High Court at its level itself becomes conscious that the decision G 
was wrong and was not worth repeating as a precedent. And yet it is repeated 
time and again. Having said this much, we hope and trust that unless the High 
Court can justify its decision on principle and precept, it should better desist 
from passing such orders for it puts the 'Rule of Law' to a mockery and 
promotes rather the 'Rule of Man'. 
H 
897 
A 
898 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1998) I S.C.R 
All the same, fond hopes were raised in the minds of the students, 
herein. Therefore, we decline to interfere wider Article 136 of the Constitution. 
The S.L.Ps. are, accordingly, dismissed. 
T.N.A. 
Petitions dismissed. 
1
1' 
'