The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.P.(C) No.22659 of 2025 In the matter of an application under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950. ---- Anshuman Beuria …. Petitioner -versus- State of Odisha, represented through the Principal Secretary, Department of Agriculture & Farmers’ Empowerment & Others …. Opposite Parties Advocates Appeared in this case For Petitioner - M/s.Uma Charan Mishra, A. Mishra & J.K. Mahapatra, Advocates
Legal Reasoning
For Opp. Parties - Mr.Satya Brata Mohanty, AGA for O.P.1, M/s.Subash Ch. Rath & M.K.Parida, Advocates for O.Ps.2 & 3 --- CORAM MR. JUSTICE DIXIT KRISHNA SHRIPAD ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date of Hearing & Judgment : 25.11.2025 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- PER DIXIT KRISHNA SHRIPAD, J. Petition prayer makes out the grievance and therefore, the same is reproduced as under:- Page 1 of 6 “It is therefore prayed that your Lordships shall be graciously pleased enough to admit the aforesaid writ application and after hearing the parties concerned, quash the Office Order Dtd 07.08.2025 as under Annexure-4 and direct the opp. parties more particularly opp. party no-2 to 4 to accept the Semester Fees with any late fine as the Hon’ble Court may direct from the petitioner and to allow the petitioner to appear the final 6th Semester B.Sc AG examination going to commence from 16.08.2025 and to provide her Admit card and facilitate the appearance of the petitioner in 6th Semester Final examination……” 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there was belated payment of fees and in that connection, an apology letter is also tendered by his client. He points out the ad interim order dated 13.08.2025, which reads as under:- “Issue emergent notice. Learned ASC -Mr. Ray, on request of the Court, accepts notice for OP.1. An extra copy of the writ petition with all the documents be served on him within three working days. Notice be sent to OPs.2 & 3 by speed post with A.D. returnable within 10 days, requisite for which shall be furnished within three working days. In addition, it is open to the Petitioner to serve a copy of the writ petition along with all the documents on the leaned Panel Counsel, who usually represents the University. Petitioner, having been debarred from 6th Semester, B.Sc, 2. Agricultural Science course, is complaining before the Court about the Court action, the examinations being around. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner submits that the debar in question is due to non-remittance of semester fees and the said fees could not be remitted because of some financial and medical difficulties and further that now he would remit the same along with admissible fee and, therefore, Petitioner should be granted permission to appear in the imminent examination scheduled to commence from 16.08.2025. There is reason and logic Page 2 of 6 in the submission. If Petitioner is permitted to take up the examination subject to outcome of the main matter, no prejudice would be caused to anyone. On the contrary, if that course is not adopted, an innocent student may suffer and that would not augur well to the society.
Decision
In the above circumstances, the OP-University is directed to accept Petitioner’s remittance of prescribed fees along with the admissible penalty and permit him to take up the imminent examination subject to result of the writ petition. Call this matter on 26.08.2025 for reporting compliance of this interim direction….” Added, he further submits that right to education being a sort of Fundamental Right recognised under Article 21 of the Constitution of India vide Mohini Jain v. State of Karnataka, AIR 1992 SC 1858, ordinarily the approach of the institutions and Court should be pro-education disregarding the procedural hurdles. He also tells that now pursuant to interim order, his client having already written the examination, the admission should be regularised and the result of such examination should be published so that he can prosecute the course in a wholesale way. 3. Learned Panel Counsel for the University vehemently opposes the petition by filing the detailed Counter. He contends that when all other students could comply timeline, why the petitioner did not do so remains a riddle wrapped in enigma and therefore, no relief can be granted to him contrary to the University Regulations that prescribe the normative procedure Page 3 of 6 for admission of the kind. He also alerts the Court that directing registration of admission merely because an interim order has been granted by this Court pursuant to which, a candidate has taken the admission, would be laying a very bad precedent. To this, counsel for the petitioner retorts that already three more students have taken admission after the cut-off date and therefore, there is no reason to treat the cut-off date as a Portia’s Knife in Shakespear’s ‘The Merchant of Venice’ (1600). 4. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the petition papers, this Court, in the peculiar fact matrix of the case is inclined to grant relief to the petitioner broadly agreeing with his counsel’s submission. 4.1. Petitioner rightly or wrongly, could not remit the fees for admission within time although he has paid examination fees for 7th Semester. He has tendered an unconditional apology vide letter dated 01.08.2025, which reads as under: “1st August, 2025 To The Dean College of Agriculture, OUAT, BBSR Subject: Request for permission to pay college fees via demand draft due to delay in fee payment. Respected Sir, Page 4 of 6 I am writing to sincerely apologize and seek your kind permission regarding an issue with my semester fee payment. I sincerely apologise for the misinformation I previously shared regarding my fee payment. I had mentioned it was paid, but in reality, I failed to pay in on time due to my own oversight. I take full responsibility for the mistake. I kindly request the cancellation of my earlier application and seek your permission to proceed with the comptroller fee payment. I assure you this will not happen again. Yours Sincerely, Sd/- Ansuman Beuria” The petitioner having acknowledged his fault, calls for lenient consideration. An honest apology ordinarily dilutes the guilt, says the Bible (Psalm 32:5). 4.2. The University is an instrumentality of State under Article 12 of the Constitution of India vide Ujjam Bai v. State of UP, AIR 1962 SC 1621 U.P. State & its instrumentalities have to treat the citizens with soft gloves. Kofi Annan (1938-2018) at the ‘World Bank Conference-Global Knowledge, 97’ has rightly said that “Education is the premise of progress in every society & in every family”. Heavens will not fall down if the petitioner’s innocuous lapse is condoned and his admission to the next level is regularised with fine, if any. Thus, justice of the case warrants regularisation of petitioner’s admission to the next level and subsequent publication of the examination results, which he has appeared in, as to complete the course in a peaceable way. Page 5 of 6 4.3. Learned Panel Counsel for the University is more than justified in contending that, whatever relief this Court is going to grant in this judgment, may become a dangerous precedent and therefore, this judgment should not be treated as laying down any law of precedential value. It hardly needs to be stated that the relief being granted in the peculiar fact matrix of the case, the Panel Counsel of the University need not have that apprehension. In the above circumstances, this petition is allowed. The University is directed to grant admission to the petitioner for the next level of the course. The result of the examination, which the petitioner has written, shall be announced forthwith to facilitate his completion to the course in a general way subject to all compliances. Now, no costs. Web copy of judgment to be acted upon by all concerned. Orissa High Court, Cuttack The 25th Day of November,2025/Basu Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: BASUDEV NAYAK Designation: ADDL. DY. REGISTRAR-CUM-ADDL. PRINCIPAL SECY Reason: Authentication Location: HIGH COURT OF ORISSA : CUTTACK Date: 28-Nov-2025 11:09:12 (Dixit Krishna Shripad) Judge Page 6 of 6