(D ^ 1 IN THE fflGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR (C.G^ W.RNO.'^Lo-y /2005. PETITIONER^ .^^ -^ ^ey' ^><t' ^ RESPONDENTS ^:' \^ ^ ^fj:^ RUCffl SURANA, D/o Kailash Surana, Aged about 19 years, R/o 'Surana Sadan', 19, Vivekanand Nagar, Raipur (C.G.). VERSUS 1. STATE OF CHHATHSGARH, ThroughChief Secretary, Office situated at Secretariate Raipur (C.G.). ^^ b ^s^ Secretary, Education Department, ^1 Office situated at Secretariate Raipur (C.G.) 3. Secretary, Chhattisgarh Board of Secondary Education, Raipur, Ofl5ce situated at Secretariate Raipur, (C.G.) WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTI- TUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF A WRIT IN THE NATURE OF MANDAMUS/PROHIBITION/CERTIORARI/ DIRECTION/DIRECTIONS,ORDER/ORDERS. XI-HC-22 3^^NI^S^,\9Tft^al<o, fa^Wy 3TT%?T M^<t» ^I^KII $h^lW.vj.^^.^a?^ ^°°f 1200 18 <fl1^T^T fN^^Fff ^HW^^T ,/--^-- W^T?^crTW^f?(T 29-6-2005 Shri N.S. Dhurandhar, coun| ^ihri Sandeep Dubey, 9oyt No.l and 2. Shrl H.B. Agrawal, Sr. Advocate for respondent No.3; Heard. . ' The petitioner has preferr^d this writ petition under Artlcb 226 of the 'Constitution of India. Tl that the. marks awarded to her m answers given by her in the answ^ The of the petitioner secured- 8-1.8% marks which is Higher Secondary Examination ^h F^. ;!^r of the petlti Examination, 2005 with fuli p| questions correctSy and, therefo| wiEi secyre more .marks, but shej ^i^fe^nw^f^te^I^^R: P-f ^NRl^I sei for the petitioner. Adyocate for the State/respondents Uvocate .with Ms.. Sangee-ta Mishra, ie main grievance of the petitioner is the P.M-T. Examination, 2005 are much Sess than what she expecring looking to her'performance and r sheet, . " Is that she has a briliiant studenl through out her educationai care^r. In the .High -School Examination- evident from Annexure-^/2. In the ....xcured 73%.marks. )ner is that :she' appeared in the P.M<T. separation orid she a!l the le, she was sure and confident that she has awarded marks than her •expectation in almostaii the subj^cts. XI-HC-22 3^T ^l^ld^, ^Tfl^^<o, [®l<ni<-t^< 311^1 M?ich flTO^TTgiWTgFT""""""""""' ^^ 200 19 ^TT^T^T f^TT^W^T 5b^ich^cT r W^T^cTTW^'fN' -<^- It i.s admitted -position tL| regarding re-evaiuation of the an| rnade in the petition are about e; an-svyers'given by her in'the ans^ eareer.is concemed, iooking to the 10 -Board Examination and ll that is an extraordinary bri student. Apart from that, the.pe· Medica! Test was a competitiv^ scats.were.there and for that sti| of their merit Therefore, thei must have performed better th petltioner not to secure petitioner'has not. able to .b the petitioner's an' 0x4 interference by this Court wh under Articie 226 of the Constitil' When there is no provisior| circumstances, the petitioner is connection, the-Hon'bie Apex Co| : V. <=bi^41'i wr^rfffte^<{^^j< ^3Tf^T3TI^r |at there'is-no provision in the ruies i^wer sheets. Moreaver, the averments t:pectation >of the petltioner as.per the ;^er sheet.' As far as past educationai t|ie marks ob-tained.by thepetitioner in l^ Board Examination it cannot be sdd liiant student but she was a-mediocre .ritioner shouid not forget that'the Pre- ©xamination.and Jimited numbers o.f idents were to be seiected on.the |e is every chance that 'other students m the peti+ioner and that is why the . Iposition" in the merit list. 'Moreover/ the wg on record any materia! which |eptiona! case, which warrants the le invoking extraordinary Jurisdiction Ition of India. regarding re-evaiuation, .in the normal 'iot entitled for re-evaluation. In this ?|urt in the matter of XI-HC-22 3^cT r^|<41d<4, ^^4^, ^crtl^y 20 Sliq^l M5icr> (TTO^TT^^Icb ^ 200 Id<)<4 ^TI^T^T f^TT^W^T 5hHicb'yRc1 _ 3^1^1?^cffW -1- baok^. chl^d41^ ^l^dT^te^rf^K ^3tf^q"3:n^T reported in 2004 AIR-SCW 4541 heid that 'in the ab^ence of\any prayi^lon In rules for reweva!uation ofan^wer baok^Na candidate i^^ntitled ta re-evaluaiian afan^wer "herefore, I am of the opin in the petition, the petitioner has| interfBrence by this Courtand dir of the petitloner; However, before parting wj-| that repeatedly such petitions ar^ year raising doubts about the eval^ on that in view of the facts mentioned not been abie to make. out a for ^cting for re-evaiuation of the answer ^ic successive petitions which are "h this praer, I would lik-e to obserye e being filed by the students every. ation sys1"em of the Board. Looking 'to being fiSed questioning the eyaluation lative that the Board must devise a lcandidates/students can know about e'examination. By deyising a systern, system of the Board,'it.is Jmper|< transparent system whereby the. their. merit and 'performance at tr|. the Board's wil! be enhanc^d, the student cominunity wjil have |and, therefore/they'.are required Imore faith and confidence in the efc not be un.necessariiy dragged into |iuthorities shouid bear in mind th^t they are occupying the pubiicpost xamination.system, an-d the Board wiii^ |the iitigation repeatediy. . The Board to devise some systern so that the ^tudent/candidate's grievunces ^re redressed by .adopting some XI-HC-22 TS[ ^\^w^y ^^^\<oy ^^iwy 21 3TT^T q^fcb RT^^TF^^Icb ^ 200 3TI^rT^T i<^i<=h3T[^T 5b^i<t)^cT >-.t '^. 3:n^T?^TT^K^f?cT -^ transparent method^ in the examir that now the students 'have 'performance at the ex^uh'^ation. system . wherseby the student ca answer sheet/ as per the practi^- Bvaiuation of the answer. paper| candidate is required to answer tl^ circies Qiven in the answer shet scanned by the Electronic Sca} Therefore, it is not difficuit for take .carbon copy of the answer sheet, the Board can wh| one additional simiiar answer sH whatever answl main flrst answer-sheet wi!l autorl by the carbon, 'Whib 1-aking carb<| his per3formance at the examinati also pubjish the mode! answers ^ examination in order to enabie'thl performance at 'the examination thsm. This is not a'new systemi 4)l<uld41^ Wraf ^fte^t <fa^l< ^3Tf^q'3TI^T ation system. It is common knowledge become 'u^.a vigiiant .about their In my opinion, th©Board can devise a be aibwed to take carbon-copy of |e prevaient for Pre-Medicai Test for (Optical Mark Reader ' Sheet). The e question by filiing one circle out of 4 ^t by Hard- Bbck Pencli and that 'is tiner for. the purpose of eyaiuation. the Board to allow the candidate to meet and for aiiowing to take copy of |le preparing the answer'sheet attach leet with a'-carbon between the two !^r wi!! be given by tne candidate in the taticaily-be marked on the second copy n copy the student wi!I be abie to know i^)n. Apart from that, the Board shouid |f the questions within'7 of the. k candidates/ students to assess their on the of 'carbon copy given to and I am told that such a system is ^ r XI-HC-22 ^^- 3^'•=3TPTT<$;ra', ^^^(0, RdW^ 31(^1 M5)ch ^ l^c^l l sh-4 lcb -^-4^»- ---— ^qj- 200 3TI^T^T ^i<=h3TT^T Sb^ich^f?cT ^ tt BQFVC '^ ^- v b ^' 3TT^T5^fT^:^cT ^-« pretolent in many States. In m[, students. from fiiing such. petitio|' students to know their p8rforman| prepare for the future examinati^n know his/her performance at the appropriate decision about his/her^ In yiew of the above, I dlr^ct the Examination, Chhattisgarh to the difficuity which is being fa^ ^ opinion, this system wiii desist the |is. Tt witl aiso be benefidai for the fce and'merit at-the examination and to accordingiy/ if.the student.is.abie to '(sxamination, then he/she can aiso tuke. future career. loard .reaches to the conciusion be devised in comparison to wha-|' Board can devise the system. With the observation aforefeaid Consequently, M.(W.)P. No.^; stand disposed of. Parties are entitEed for cer+ <=hl4ld41^ 414dT^ fe^ <Rl<-^l< ^3Tf^T3TT^T the Chairman, Secondary. Board of G systeiTi in order to overcome. ea by tSie students. Howev'er, if the iat any better transparent system can has above, then the' said, the petition stands disposed of. 239/2005 and l.A. No.5388/2005.aiso ified copy of thi^ order. Sd/- L.C. Bhadoo Judge (^s^)