Student Can’t Be Made To Suffer Because Of University’s Clerical Error: Supreme Court Directs Issuance Of Law Student’s Degree
The appellant had approached the Supreme Court seeking release of her marksheets and her degree in law, having completed a BA.LLB course at Manav Bharti University.
Justice Vikram Nath, Justice Augustine George Masih, Justice Sandeep Mehta, Supreme Court
The Supreme Court has granted relief to a law student by asking the University to issue her the marksheets, degree, and relevant documents while observing that the exclusion of her name from the admission disclosure list was a clerical error at the University’s end in which the Appellant had no part.
The appellant had approached the Apex Court seeking release of her marksheets of the 7th to 10th semester and her degree in law, having completed the BA.LLB programme, batch of 2016-2021, at Manav Bharti University (University).
The 3-Judge Bench of Justice Vikram Nath, Justice Augustine George Masih, and Justice Sandeep Mehta held, “From the perusal of above-quoted affidavit and the documents on record, it is undisputed that the Appellant was a bona fide student of the university, admitted against an allotted seat, who appeared in and cleared all her examinations. The exclusion of her name from the admission disclosure list is, on the university’s own admission, a clerical error at its own end in which the Appellant had no part, and the Appellant cannot be made to bear its consequences and suffer.”
Advocate Dhriti Sharma represented the Petitioner while AOR Bhupender Singh represented the Respondent.
Factual Background
The Appellant took admission in the five-year BA.LLB course in the Department of Law of MB University for the session 2016-2021. She was issued Bonafide Certificates, a hostel identity card for the session July 2016 to June 2017, and the Detailed Marks Certificates of the 1st to 6th semesters. The university also certified her subject-wise grade points in the 8th and 9th semesters. On a complaint regarding the alleged sale of degrees by the university, several cases came to be registered against its then administration, and its records were seized in the course of investigation. In the meanwhile, the Detailed Marks Certificates of the Appellant for the 7th to 10th semesters and her degree were not issued. On a letter addressed by the students of the university to the Chief Justice of the High Court, a PIL came to be registered.
The university informed the Appellant that, though her name was reflected in the Green Sheet Register for the session 2016-2017, it was not reflected in the admission disclosure list provided by the Special Investigation Team, and her marksheets, degree and other documents could not be issued or verified. Aggrieved, the Appellant approached the High Court seeking issuance of documents.
Meanwhile, the PIL came to be disposed of with the observation that the High Court was not in a position to determine the disputed questions of fact arising from the status of the students placed on record by the university. The High Court disposed of the writ petition of the Appellant by making the said order applicable mutatis mutandis. Aggrieved thereby, the Appellant approached the Apex Court.
Reasoning
On a perusal of the facts of the case, the Bench noted that it was mentioned in the University’s affidavit that, due to a clerical and inadvertent human error on the part of its previous administration, the name of the Appellant was not included in the admission disclosure list sent to HP-PERC, and the name of one Pankaj Kumar was mistakenly forwarded instead.
The Bench also took note of the fact that Pankaj Kumar had independently taken admission in the year 2015 for the academic session 2015-2020 under a different admission and registration number, and that his inclusion in place of the Appellant was a clerical mismatch and not a substitution or deletion of the actual admission of the Appellant.
The Bench thus held that the Appellant was deprived of her documents for no fault of hers for a substantial period of time, and relegating her to a court of competent jurisdiction was not called for.
Thus, allowing the appeal, the Bench set aside the impugned order qua the Appellant. “The university is directed to issue the marksheets of the 7th to 10th semesters, the degree, and any other relevant documents, including the Character Certificate and the Migration Certificate, to the Appellant within four weeks from the receipt of this judgment”, it ordered.
Cause Title: Stuti Sharma v. Manav Bharti University (MBU) And Others (Neutral Citation: 2026 INSC 1117)
Appearance
Appellant: Advocates Dhriti Sharma, Swaroopanad Mishra, AOR Ajay Marwah, Advocates Mrigank Bhardwaj, Rahul Kumar, Ravideep Badyal, Shivani Singh, Sainyam Bhardwaj, Ravi Shandil
Respondent: AOR Bhupender Singh, Advocates Mayank Kumar, Shimpy Arman Sharma, Arman Roop Sharma, Mohd. Aman Khan Afghani, Nishkarsh Kumar Pharswal, Sugandh Kochhar, Priyanka Dubey, Amit Kumar Pandey, Chandra Kishore Yadav, AOR Vinod Kumar Tewari