IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No.1130 of 2010 (M/S) Km. Mukta (Minor) .…Petitioner Versus Board of School Education ...Respondent Mr. Navneesh Negi, Advocate holding brief of Mr. G.S. Negi, Advocate for the petitioner. Mrs. Seema Sah, Advocate for the respondent. Hon’ble V.K. Bist, J. Present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner for the following reliefs:- i. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent to re-examine/revaluate the answer books of English, Mathematics and Physics subjects of the petitioner bearing roll no.058090 in Intermediate Examination, 2010. ii. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent to expedite the scrutiny of petitioner’s answer books of English, Mathematics and Physics bearing roll no.058090 in Intermediate Examination 2010 on the basis of her application for scrutiny (Annexure No.2). iii. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent to issue a fresh mark-sheet to the petitioner, if she gets more marks in the subjects. iv. Issue any writ, order or direction which this Hon’ble Court may deem just fit and proper. 2 v. The cost of the petition may be awarded to the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner appeared in Intermediate Examination, 2010 with the subjects Hindi, English, Mathematics, Physics and Chemistry from Government Inter College, Augustyamuni, District-Rudraprayag. Her roll number was 058090. Contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner is a student of Class XII and has excellent academic career. In class X Examination she secured more than 74% marks in Board Examination. She performed excellently in her papers but marks awarded to her are less than her expectation. Therefore, she applied for scrutiny and deposited the required fee. Learned counsel for the petitioner prayed that in these circumstances the answer sheet of the petitioner be revaluated. This prayer of the petitioner cannot be permitted in view of the fact that there is no rule which provide revaluation and also in view of the law laid down in the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court reported in (1984)4 Supreme Court Cases 27, Maharashtra State Board of Secondary and Higher Secondary Education vs. Paritosh Bhupeshkumar Seth & Others. Prayer of the petitioner for revaluation cannot be allowed. However, since the petitioner has applied for the scrutiny and deposited the required fee in time, respondent is directed to scrutinize the answer sheet of the petitioner expeditiously, preferably within a period of six 3 weeks from the date of production of certified copy of the order. The writ petition is disposed of. Interim Relief Application No.5326 of 2010 also stands disposed of. (V.K.Bist. J,) 07.07.2010 Arti 4