AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
N.K. Jain, J.—By this writ petition, the petitioner seeks a direction to be issued to the respondent No. 2 for re-evaluation of the Subject No. 043 (Chemistry Theory) for Roll No. 1206082.
The respondents have filed reply and submit that the petitioner has already been intimated that they have already scrutinised the marks after re-checking of the result and no mistake has been detected. It is stated that there is no provision for re-evaluation of the marks as prayed for. Reliance has been placed on the decision of the Apex Court rendered in Central Board of Secondary Education and Anr. v. Parents Forum for Meaningful Education and Ors. bearing No. SLP (Civil) No. 17165/93 decided on 5.11.95 wherein the direction given by the High Court to the Board to consider the question of reintroducing the system of re-evaluation of answer sheets was repelled holding that in view of the law laid down by this Court, no direction can be given to the Board to introduce the system of re-evaluation and there lordships has left the question entirely to the discretion of the Board. Learned Counsel for the respondents has also relied on the decision of the Punjab & Haryana High Court in Gulshan Grover Vs. M.D. University, Rohtak, where it has been held that "to my mind re-evaluation cannot be allowed as of right as it may lead to gross and indefinite uncertainties regarding ranking of candidates more particularly in absence of any rules to such effect."
I have heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the material on record.
The petitioner has not been able to show that earlier there were rules for re-evaluation of the answer books more particularly when the learned Counsel for the respondents has categorically denied the same.
On the other hand as per Bye Law 61(d) of the Examination Bye Laws of 1990, the work of scrutiny does not include the re-evaluation of answer-books but is confined to re-checking of marks awarded for each question in the answer-book together with re-totalling of marks.
That apart the petitioner is not entitled for any relief, as he has already appeared in the compartment examination of the subject in which he has earlier failed and not declared successful. In view of this, no relief can be granted to the petitioner.
The writ petition is accordingly dismissed with no order as to costs.