Writ petition dismissed for failure to cure office objections despite repeated opportunities.

The petitioners—four D.El.Ed. colleges and their students—invoked Article 226 of the Constitution seeking to quash endorsements dated 30 June 2023 and to direct the authorities to consider internal assessment and practical marks while announcing the results

On 9 September 2026, the Court granted a final extension until 28 September 2026 to comply with office objections and directed that the petition be relisted for dismissal if they remained outstanding

The objections were not complied with

1. Whether the writ petition should be dismissed when the petitioners failed to comply with office objections despite being granted a final extension

2. Whether the substantive challenges to the endorsements and the requested relief concerning assessment marks required determination

The Court applied the procedural direction in its order of 9 September 2026: the petitioners were granted until 28 September 2026 to remove the office objections, with dismissal to follow upon non-compliance

Although the petition was brought under Article 226, the Court cited no statute, precedent, or substantive legal doctrine in deciding the matter; it made no determination on the merits

The Court had already granted a final opportunity to comply and expressly warned that failure would result in dismissal

As the objections remained outstanding, it applied that direction and dismissed the petition for non-compliance

It did not examine the validity of the endorsements or the claim for consideration of internal assessment and practical marks

The substantive relief sought was not adjudicated