HIGH COURT OF UTTARANCHAL AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 253 (M/S) of 2006 With Stay Application No. 3070/06 1. Dr. Sareveshawar Prasad Raturi S/o Late Sri Geeta Ram Raturi Resident of Mishra Bhawan, Near Krishi Bhawan Srinagar Road, Pauri District-Pauri Garhwal. On behalf of his minor Daughter Kumari Anuradha Raturi. 2. Pushkar Singh Rawat S/o Late Sri T.S. Rawat Resident of P.N.B. Building Dhara Road Pauri District- Pauri Garhwal on behalf of his minor Daughter Kumar Srishti Rawat. …Petitioners Vs 1. State of Uttaranchal through Secretary Education Secretariat, Subhash Road, Dehradun. 2. District Education Officer, Pauri, District- Pauri Garhwal. 3. Uttaranchal Intermediate and High School Education Board through Additional Secretary, Uttaranchal Examination Council, Ramnagar, District-Nainital, Uttaranchal. …Respondents Sri Atul Bahuguna learned counsel for the petitioners Sri V.K. Bist learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Ambrish Chatterjee learned counsel for the respondent No.3 Sri Nand Prasad learned Standing Counsel for the respondent No.1 and 2. Dated: 22-3-2006 Hon’ble B.S. Verma, J. Heard Sri Atul Bahuguna learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri V.K. Bist, Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Ambrish Chatterjee learned counsel for the respondent No. 3 and Sri Nand Prasad learned Standing counsel for the respondent No.s 1 and 2. The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with a prayer for issuing a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to issue the computerized Mark Sheet to the daughter of petitioners. Learned counsel for the petitioners have stated that they made an oral request to the principal but the principal had not issued computerized mark sheet. The petitioners may make a representation to the respondent No.3 to redress his grievance. If the petitioners make a representation to the respondent No.3, the same may be decided by the respondent No.3 within four weeks from date of production of the certified copy of the order. The petitioners have also prayed for revaluate, recheck or recount and scrutinize the subject of Social Science and Science. Learned counsel for the respondent No.3 has stated that scrutiny has already been done by the Board. As far as the re-evaluation is concerned that is not permissible under the Rules. The petition is devoid of merit. With the said observation the writ petition is dismissed. (B.S. Verma,J) Dated: 22-3-2006 M.K.