IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 29TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 7TH ASWINA 1932 WP(C).No. 29937 of 2010(N) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- AMRITA BENOY, AGED 18, D/O.BENOY THOMAS, 35/617 A, VASANTH NAGAR COLONY ROAD, PALARIVATTOM, KOCHI-25. BY ADV. SRI.PAULSON THOMAS RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. REGIONAL OFFICER, CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION, REGIONAL OFFICE, PLOT NO.1630A (NEW NO.3) J BLOCK, 16TH MAIN ROAD, ANNA NAGAR (WEST) CHENNAI-600 040, TAMILNADU. 2. CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION, DELHI, P-S, 1-2 INSTITUTION AREA, I.P., EXTENSION, PATPARGANJ-DELHI-110 092- REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY. SC SRI. DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. -------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO.29937 OF 2010(N) -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 29th day of September, 2010 J U D G M E N T Petitioner passed Plus two from a school affiliated to the respondents in the year 2010. Ext.P1 is the mark list. According to the petitioner, she wanted to appear again in the examination for improving her marks in some of the subjects including Mathematics. Although she obtained an application form from the respondents, having regard to the provisions in clause 44(1) of the Examination Bye Laws, petitioner submits that she is ineligible to appear for improvement for the reason that she is pursuing her higher studies. It is in this background that this writ petition is filed challenging clause 44(1) of the Examination Bye Laws. 2. Clause 44(i) of the Examination Bye Laws reads as under. (i) A candidate who has passed an examination of the Board may reappear for improvement of performance in one or more subjects in the main examination in the succeeding year only; however, a candidate who has passed an examination of the Board under Vocational Scheme may reappear for improvement of performance in one or more subject in the main examination in the succeeding year and the following year provided they have not pursued higher studies in the meantime. They will appear as private candidates. Those reappearing for the whole examination may however appear as regular school candidates also if admitted by the school as regular student.” WPC.No. 29937/2010 :2 : 3. This provision shows that only those candidates who are not perusing higher studies are eligible to appear in an examination, for improving their marks. Obviously, since the petitioner is perusing her higher studies, she is ineligible. Such a provision has been incorporated in the Regulation for the reason that, if a student who is pursuing higher studies is allowed to appear for improvement of the subject of the lower classes, the student having undergone courses of higher level, the knowledge and capacity of the student cannot be same or equivalent as compared to the students of the concerned class, who are not pursing their higher studies and appearing for the examination along with him. What is to be assessed in the understanding capacity and knowledge of the student. This will not be possible if the student concerned in undergoing higher courses. This is to avoid this disparity, above provision is incorporated in the Examination Bye Laws. Such a restrictive provision, cannot be said to be arbitrary for any reason and therefore I am not persuaded to agree with the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the provision is illegal. WPC.No. 29937/2010 :3 : 4. Even otherwise, the provision for revaluation, improvement etc. are covered by the rules framed and if there is no rule providing such facilities or if the Rules are conditional as in this case, a student has no right to complain of the same. In that view of the matter, the writ petition is only to be dismissed and is dismissed. (ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE vi/