IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (S/B) No. 43 of 2010 Sundeep Gupta …Petitioner. Versus High Court of Uttarakhand at Nainital, through Registrar General. …Respondent. Mr. Kartikey Hari Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner. Coram: Hon’ble J.S. Khehar, C.J. Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. J.S. Khehar, C.J, (Oral) The grievance of the petitioner in the instant writ petition is his apprehension that he has not been appropriately evaluated for the written examination conducted for appointment to the post of Additional District & Sessions Judges advertised on 17.6.2009. It is, therefore, the prayer of the petitioner that his answer sheet should be rechecked/re-evaluated so as to redetermine his assessment in the written examination. At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioner acknowledges that there is no legal right vested in the petitioner to seek rechecking or re-evaluation on account of the fact that there is no statutory, legal or other provision provided for rechecking or re-evaluation of the answer-sheets under reference. For the reasons recorded hereinabove and acknowledged by learned counsel, we are satisfied that the instant writ petition is misconceived and the same is accordingly hereby dismissed as misconceived. (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.) (J.S. Khehar, C.J.) 25.3.2010 Rathour