NEW DELHI: Holding that an institutional clerical lapse cannot become a ground to penalise a bona fide student or stall their career, the Supreme Court of India has set aside an order of the Himachal Pradesh High Court and directed Manav Bharti University and the State Government to verify the academic credentials of a candidate working without salary in Jammu and Kashmir. A three-judge bench comprising Justice Vikram Nath, Justice Augustine George Masih, and Justice Sandeep Mehta ruled that internal discrepancies and clerical omissions by the university cannot be visited with adverse consequences upon a student who had legitimately secured admission, cleared all examinations, and obtained his degree.
The appellant, Mohd. Asad Choudhary, had approached the apex court against an order dated December 20, 2024, passed by the High Court of Himachal Pradesh at Shimla in CWP No. 14955 of 2024 (connected with CWPIL No. 22 of 2022). The High Court had refused to adjudicate the verification claims and relegated the appellant, alongside other students, to approach a competent court of civil jurisdiction for the redressal of their grievances.
Case Background
Choudhary was enrolled in the B.Tech (Civil Engineering) programme at Manav Bharti University for the 2014–2018 academic session under Admission No. R14BTCE0031 and Registration No. MBU-2014-0964. Having completed his eight semesters, he was issued Detailed Marks Certificates (DMCs), Bonafide, Migration, and Character Certificates dated September 14, 2018, followed by his degree certificate on October 15, 2018, which recorded that he passed in the first division.
Following the completion of his course, Choudhary was appointed as a Sub-Inspector in the State Taxes Department, Jammu and Kashmir. The Office of the Additional Commissioner, State Taxes (Administration and Enforcement), Kashmir, repeatedly sought verification of his academic credentials from the university through communications sent in May 2022, September 2023, December 2023, and July 2024. The employer noted that the appellant’s appointment remained subject to academic verification. In the absence of such verification, he continued in service without receiving his salary.
Meanwhile, following complaints regarding the alleged sale of degrees by Manav Bharti University, criminal cases were registered against its then administration, and records were seized by a Special Investigation Team (SIT). As students struggled to obtain academic records, letters to the High Court led to the registration of CWPIL No. 22 of 2022. Pursuant to the High Court’s directions, the State Government constituted a Document Verification Committee on August 16, 2022, headed by the Superintendent of Police, Solan, and comprising the University Administrator and the Secretary of the Himachal Pradesh Private Educational Institutions Regulatory Commission (HP-PERC).
Although the university’s records confirmed Choudhary was enrolled in approved seats for 2014–15 and his name appeared on the internal “Green Sheet”, his name had not been transmitted to HP-PERC in the admission disclosure list. Furthermore, a mismatch was noted between the marks listed in the result gazette and the Green Sheet for his seventh and eighth semesters. The High Court, citing disputed questions of fact, closed the proceedings and directed the students to pursue civil remedies.
Arguments Before the Supreme Court
Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that Choudhary was admitted against sanctioned seats, cleared every semester examination, and was issued all authentic academic documents. Counsel argued that his name duly existed in the primary Green Register and examination archives, and his grievance pertained solely to verification sought by his employer since 2022. It was contended that the failure to forward his name in the disclosure list was an administrative fault of the university over which he possessed no control, and relegating him to a civil court after years of litigation while he served without pay was highly burdensome and inequitable.
In response, the State of Himachal Pradesh and the Director General of Police submitted that while the appellant’s name was found in the Green Register for the 2014–15 session, it was absent from the admission disclosure list sent to HP-PERC. The State highlighted that the marks recorded in the result gazette for the seventh semester (783/1300) and eighth semester (920/1300) did not reconcile with the Green Sheet figures of 863/1300 and 946/1300, respectively, preventing the Committee from verifying his credentials.
The university, through its counter-affidavit, admitted that Choudhary was enrolled against allotted seats and cleared all semesters. It conceded that his name was maintained in the primary internal Green Sheet Register and that the omission in the disclosure list sent to HP-PERC was due to a clerical and inadvertent human error by the previous administration. In an additional affidavit, the Superintendent of Police, Solan, reiterated that original documents were with trial courts and that the Committee’s mandate did not extend to altering or correcting university records.
Court’s Analysis and Findings
The bench led by Justice Augustine George Masih, who authored the judgment, observed that the material on record incontrovertibly established the appellant’s status as a genuine student. The bench noted:
“The affidavits and the documents on record thus leave no manner of doubt that the Appellant was a bona fide student at the University, admitted against an allotted seat, who appeared in and cleared all his examinations. The omission of his name from the admission disclosure list is, on the University’s own admission, a lapse on its part in which the Appellant had no role. Such a lapse cannot be visited with adverse consequences upon the Appellant, nor can it be a ground for withholding the verification of his academic credentials.”
Addressing the discrepancy in marks between the result gazette and the Green Sheet for the final two semesters, the court noted that under both sets of marks, the appellant’s result was unambiguously declared as “pass.” The bench observed:
“The discrepancy, thus, does not touch upon the admission of the Appellant, his status as a student at University, or the fact that he passed the course. Therefore, it stands established that the Appellant has validly passed all the examinations, as indeed the entire course and was duly conferred with the degree as per his entitlement.”
The court held that resolving which of the two internal university figures accurately reflected the exact scores was a matter of internal record verification, which did not require trial-stage evidence from the student or justify relegating him to a civil court.
The Decision
Setting aside the High Court’s order dated December 20, 2024, qua the appellant, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal and issued specific operational directives to conclude the verification process promptly:
- The State Government was directed to provide the result records of the appellant’s seventh and eighth semesters available with the Committee to the university.
- The university was directed to issue corrected Detailed Marks Certificates for the seventh and eighth semesters, along with any necessary consequential certificates, based on those records.
- The university was ordered to forward the formal verification report of the appellant’s credentials to the Additional Commissioner, State Taxes (Administration and Enforcement), Kashmir, within three weeks.
- Upon receipt of the verification report, the employer was directed to release all arrears of salary along with consequential benefits to the appellant within a period of four weeks.
The court made no order as to costs and disposed of all pending applications.
Case Title: Mohd. Asad Choudhary v. State of Himachal Pradesh and Others
Case No.: Civil Appeal No. ___ of 2026 (Arising out of SLP (C) No. 474 of 2026)
Bench: Justice Vikram Nath, Justice Augustine George Masih, Justice Sandeep Mehta
Date of Judgment: October 14, 2026
