NEW DELHI: In an unusual turn of events, a student from Himachal Pradesh was forced to seek the Supreme Court’s intervention to get her LLB degree after completing the course from Manav Bharti University during 2017-22.
Allowing the appeal of Pratima Das, a Bench of Justice Vikram Nath and Justice AG Masih directed the university to issue the marksheets of 5th to 10th semester, the degree and any other relevant documents, if any, to her in four weeks from the date of judgment (January 6, 2026).
“Having regard to the above established facts based on records, we are of the view that the Appellant has been deprived of her documents for no fault of hers for a substantial period of time…,” the Bench said.
Following an FIR, an investigation by a Special Investigation Team (SIT) was launched against MB University on the allegation of sale of fake degrees and the SIT seized the complete records of MB University in 2019.
Since the matter was pending adjudication before the court of Additional District and Sessions Judge, Solan, the students of the University, including appellant Pratima Das, were unable to procure their academic documents.
This resulted in grave prejudice and hardship due to inability to pursue their further academic career and adversely affected future professional prospects after graduation and she was issued mark sheets for only the first four semesters.
Aggrieved by the inability of MB University to release such documents, students from different departments of batches of 2019, 2020 and 2021 jointly wrote to the Chief Justice of the Himachal Pradesh High Court highlighting their grievances and their letter was registered as a PIL in 2022.
The High Court directed MB University to constitute a committee for verification and release of the photocopies of relevant documents of students based on certain parameters and criteria.
The committee was asked to verify if the courses in which the students were found registered were duly approved by the UGC and within the allotted seats for MB University; if the record of the student found reflected in the Green register and Admission disclosure; if the data had been sent for the session for which the student was enrolled, and if the record of the examination reflects the entry of the student along with the above parameters.
Students whose admission and registration year would be disputed were not be considered for supply of documents.
When the appellant approached MB University for procuring her documents, she was informed that though she was found to be enrolled in the green register, her name was not reflected in the admission disclosure list for the session 2017-2018. Instead, the name of one Ayaan Narwal was mentioned against her admission number. Due to such circumstances, her documents could not be issued to her.
Aggrieved by the non-acceptance of her request for supply of documents, Das approached the High Court which disposed of her plea with a direction to the custodian of the records to decide her case after giving her an opportunity of being heard. She submitted a representation to the Superintendent of Police, Solan, Himachal Pradesh, who had the custody of the records of MB University, for issuance of her unsupplied marksheets. This was rejected on the ground that her name did not reflect in the admission disclosure list.
She moved the High Court once again only to withdraw it with liberty to avail of the appropriate remedy. In the meanwhile, an interim order was passed in the pending PIL directing the Registrar of the university to provide the green register and disclosure list to students to enable them to verify the same.
She visited MB University, where she was handed over a copy of the green register. Based on such inspection by the students, MB University placed on record status of each of the petitioners in a tabulated form. In the affidavit filed before the court, it was stated by the Registrar of the University that 34 students visited the university for verification of their records, where several discrepancies had come to light. But the PIL petitioners disputed the university’s claim on facts and records.
The High Court ultimately disposed of the PIL on December 20, 2024, saying it was not in a position to determine such disputed questions of facts and that it would be open to the students to approach the competent court of jurisdiction for redressal of their grievances. It was this order of the high court that Das challenged before the top court.
The top court noted that “MB University has admitted that the Appellant had taken admission in the BA.LLB course… for the Academic Session 2017- 2022 and has cleared all semester-wise examinations.”
Detailed Marks Certificates for the 1st to 4th semester were issued in the normal course of university functioning and the appellant’s name was duly reflected in the University’s Green Register — the primary internal record maintained by the University.
“However, due to a clerical and inadvertent error, the name of the Appellant was not included in the admission disclosure list sent to the committee and the name of one Mr. Ayaan Narwal was mistakenly forwarded,” the university admitted.
“It has further been brought on record in the above affidavit that Mr. Ayaan Narwal had taken admission in the BA.LLB Course… for the academic session 2016-2021. Inclusion of his name in place of the name of the Appellant was a clerical mismatch and not a substitution or deletion of the Appellant’s actual admission,” the top court said, allowing the petitioner’s appeal.