B N CHUDAMANI Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this writ petition, the petitioner has sought for the following reliefs:

(2.) I directed the learned Government Advocateappearing on behalf of respondents-1 and 2 to make available the answer scripts of the petitioner for perusal. The teamed Government Advocate promptly responded by securing the answer scripts and I have perused the same. I am shocked to see lines recklessly drawn across the papers on every page as if the petitioner did not want the answers to be valued by the examiner. Except for very few pages of answers fetching small number of marks, in all other pages answers have been scored off. It appears to me that there is foulplay and the petitioner has been victimised. This is, indeed, a shocking state of affair. Apart from the question of granting appropriate relief to the petitioner, the question which arises for consideration is what action should be taken in order to locate the source of mischief and for necessary penal action against the person responsible. It is difficult to speculate at this stage and to blame any particular person in the cir cumstances of the case. However, this difficulty does not deter me from passing appropriate orders in the circumstances of the case.

(3.) The fears expressed by the petitionerand the bold assertions made in the writ petition are well founded and bear full legal scrutiny. If such instances have happened in the case of several other students and if they have not come to light, the situation would be deplorable and real concern is for the merited students who take the examination with all seriousness and sincerity after days of hard work to secure maximum marks possible by meritorious performance in the ex aminations. If such instances of this kind are not curbed and are not taken serious note of, I am afraid, that the standard of Pre-University Education would sooner rather than later reach the rock-bottom.