WB!in»Bf;.inr»"fnn«R.»i I iHC-22 'S^ •^WM1!, »Tlltl<ls. f»lc'1l'Mll< Sff^[ VRK ^ 11KCTI g,^],^--—----"-----'^^gg fq^ST" sn^r^ii R-fi* sn^i ?fi^i •^fen 311^1 ^giw^fi^ HIGH COURT OF CHSATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Wfit Petitioak (Cl No.1330/2008 PETITIONER Ku. thro'. rrem 47 y. Coloi VERSI RESPONDBNTS 1, State Dep; (C.G, Chhe Offic^ Govel throi BUE ORALl 2. 3. DHIRENDRA MISHRA. J. Shri Prateek Shamia, c\ Shri R.S. Patel, counse] Shri Raiendra Aerawal,! Heard. Bv ftus petition uaderl fhe petitioner has prayed for "10.1 To kindly caU for| 1Q.2 To kiadly issue directuig fhe rei auswcr shccts subiects to the p| ifrequired. 10.3 To kmdly issuel directing fh.e the aniended id, iiiili'i'lli ^mvii 4 fSCQ <f»l^l{ ^; srfSgiT SD^T (harti Patg],, aged about 17 years (Minor) Igh her father and Legal Guardian Shri |al Patel, S/'o Shri D.R. Patel, aged about |ars, R/o Multipurpose School Teachers \y, Pendra, District-Bilaspur of C.G. through the School Education, rtraent of , D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur .ttisgarh Board of Secondarv Education ;r, Bilaspur, District- Bflaspur (G.G.) mment Girls Higher Secondary Sobool, igh the Principal, Pendra, District- pur(C.G.) O RD E R 27. 03. 2008 )unsel for the petitioner. for respondent No2. P.L. forfheState. Article 226 of Constitution of India, he following reUefs:- the entire records ofthe case. a writ of inandamus fhereby pondents for giviug copies of of Chcinistry aad Euglish :titioner and do the revaluation a writ of mandamus thereby wndents to iuunediately issue trksheet of class 12th to thep [^ »i!3 [I-HC-22 aii^r'^i R-li«h3^1 sn+iiqi ^i^r 5- •T3 .^lilld^, ^^•y'ld. fadi'yy HWWI fbWfi "^T. 200 ^^ST' 3nt?i'^giwgf?tt 2 petitioner aad alsc| ofRs,1100/-toth^ 10.4 'l'o kindly award c{ the tune of Rs. 5 respondent Board ^nd recover the sanae froia the responsible of&cer. 10.5 To kuidly graat ai^y ofher onler which niay be deem fit iu the giv^n tacts and circumstances of fhe iastant case petition." Leamed counsel for the submitted fh.at after revalua.1 oetitioner there was a chan( petitioner aad the new inark ; the petitioner fhrough respond school He has also filed fhe re( Leamed counsel for the niark sheet, after revaluation '*i^I<'i41-f tiwi-iT'? fezt <I<i^i< ^ aiPgiT sii^i refuiid the total fee aiaount petitioner. aiapensation aad damages to lacs to tte petitioner by fhe including the cost of fhe ^espondent No. 2, ui his reply, has [ion of the Physics paper of the te ui the inarks obtauied bv fhe fcheet has alreadv beeri suuuMed to ;nt No.S/Principal offhe concemed [eipt ofAnnexure R-2 &3. loetitioner subirdts that fhe revised Ihas ak-eadv been. received bv the petitioner, however, he subini1|s fhat he is entifled for Rs.1100/- and also for fhe damages. I have heard leanied coujisel for fhe parties, So far as fhe refiuid of1|he atnount Rs.1100/- deposited by fhe petitioner for the purpos^s of revaluation is concemed, the sauie shaB be considered bv tbe resTiondent No.2 in accordance with the rules wifhia a period o|ffhree weeks. So far as the damages c]|auned by fhe petitioaer, he inay fUe aRurouriate oroceedinRs. AccordiD.gly, the petition < |s disposed of. Sd/- Dhirendra Mishra Judge