DHARAM SINGH Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is pursuing his duties in Chhattisgarh Institute of Technology, Rajnandgaon, respondent No. 2. He appeared in the second semester (Mechanical) examination, however he was declared unsuccessful in the subject of Chemistry. THE petitioner again appeared in the next session, however he was declared fail. He appeared for third time in the same subject in May, 2007 and was again declared fail in Chemistry subject. He applied for copy of the answer-sheet under the provisions of Right to Information Act, 2005 and he has filed the answer-sheet as Annexure P-2. He produced the answer-sheet before the Professors of Bhilai Institute of Technology and Digvijay, College, Rajnandgaon for fresh evaluation and they opined that the answer-sheet has been wrongly evaluated and the petitioner ought to have been declared as pass. THE petitioner applied for re-evaluation on 21.11.2007, however his prayer for re-evaluation was rejected and he was directed to appear in the examination which is proposed in the month of December, 2007.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner fairly submits that the ordinance and statutes applicable to the examination in question do not permit re-evaluation where the student fail in a particular subject while he is granted 3rd opportunity to clear the subject.

(3.) THE Court normally should not direct the production of answer scripts to be inspected by the writ petitioners unless a case is made out to show that either some question has not been evaluated or that the evaluation has been done contrary to the norms fixed by the examining body. For example, in certain cases examining body can provide model answers to the questions. In such cases the examinees satisfy the court that model answer is different from what has been adopted by the Board. THEn only the court can ask the production of answer scripts to allow inspection of the answer scripts by the examinee. (Kanpur University and Other vs. Samir Gupta and Other : AIR 1983 SC 1230). THE above view has been subsequently followed in the matter of President, Board of Secondary Education, Orissa and Another vs. D. Suvankar and Another 2007 (1) SCC 603 and it was inter alia observed as follows: