VINAY Vs. DIRECTORATE OF EDUCATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ISSUE notice to the respondents. Ms. Aruna Tikku accepts notice and produces the original answer scripts of the petitioner for the subjects Hindi, english and Mathematics.

(2.) THE learned counsel for the respondent contends that there is no rule for reevaluation of the answer sheets, however, a candidate can seek scrutiny which contemplates re-totaling of marks and ascertaining that all the answers have been evaluated. The learned counsel also contends that scrutiny was done and there is no change in the result of the petitioner. He has secured 19 marks out of 100 in Hindi, 20 marks out of 100 in english and 13 marks out of 60 in Mathematics. The learned counsel for the respondent also states that the petitioner never applied for scrutiny/rechecking and a legal notice was given and thereafter the present writ petition has been filed. The learned counsel for the respondent states that the passing marks are 25% in individual subjects and 33% marks in aggregate and the petitioner has failed. One of the answer sheet was also shown to the father of the petitioner who admitted that the answer sheets are of the petitioner. Perusal of the answer scripts of the petitioner reveals that there is no mistake in totaling and all the answers of the petitioner have been evaluated. The petitioner is not entitled for any relief in the facts and circumstances. The writ petition is misconceived and, therefore, it is dismissed.