1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 6629 OF 2009 1. Priyanka Vishawambar Musale, PETITIONERS Age 19 years, Occ. Student, Resident of At Ambegaon Po. Lahan, Tq. Ardhapur, District Nanded. 2. Shilpa Angad Nawaghare, Age 19 years, Occ. Student, Resident of At Nawgharwadi Po. Panbhosi, Tq. Kandhar,District Nanded. 3. Madhav Kondiba Kokane, Age 20 years, Occ. Student, Resident of At Sawargaon (Ni) Po. Sugaon, Tq. Degloor, District Nanded. 4. Gopal Sambhajirao Kokane, Age 19 years, Occ. Student, Resident of At Wazarga Po. Wannali, Tq. Degloor, District Nanded. V E R S U S 1. The State of Maharashtra RESPONDENTS (Through its Secretary, Secondary and Higher Education, Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai) 2. The Secretary, Maharashtra State Board of Secondary and Higher Secondary Education, Bhamburda, Bh. Agarkar Research Institute, Shivaji Nagar, Pune 5. 3. The Divisional Secretary, Maharashtra State Board, Secondary and Higher Secondary Board, Latur Division, Latur. 2 Mr. A.S. Bayas, Counsel for petitioners Mr. V.D. Rakh, Assistant Government Pleader for State Mr. V.R. Sonwalkar, Advocate for respondents No.2 & 3 CORAM : NARESH H. PATIL & K.U. CHANDIWAL, JJ. DATE : 14TH DECEMBER, 2009 ORAL JUDGMENT (Per K.U.CHANDIWAL, J.) 1. Heard the learned counsel. 2. Rule, by consent of parties, returnable forthwith. 3. The four petitioners appeared for 12th standard Examination held in February/March, 2009. In a drive taken by the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 (the Board regulating and conducting the Examinations), it was noticed that 2925 students were found to be guilty of mass-copying. Detailed enquiry was caused, petitioners were heard with respective students. The respondent No.3 canceled the performance of 12th standard Examination of the petitioners and also they were prevented from appearing for consecutive two Examinations of 12th standard. The petitioners seek to challenge the same. 4. We have gone through the record, verified the answer 3 sheets of the petitioners. We find that the assessment of the Board of copying and common answers including common mistakes is not flowing contrary to record, and it does not warrant any interference. Needless to add, considering the volume of mass-copying, the Government was alarm, which had also conducted inquiry, the inquiry report dated 30th July, 2009 is tendered before us for our perusal. The experts had also re-examined the tainted answer-sheets. There is no merit in the petition. Writ Petition is dismissed. 5. Rule discharged. (K.U. CHANDIWAL J.) (NARESH H. PATIL, J.) srm/wp/6629/09