IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE.AT BILASPUR fC.G. (9-77 /' W.P. N0. OF 2004 '' PETITIONER ":i'-::ii;i3itjsi RESPONDENTS Ku. Rupal Gupta D/o. Jeevan Lal Gupta, aged about 19 years R/o. house No. 16/570 Ist Floor Jorapara, Phool Chowk, Raipur [C.G.] VERSUS -/1^\ ^ /y^ ^•^^' ^•^..-•y ^€ / 2. 3. '.^ State of Chhattisgarh, Through the Secretaiy, Department of Education Mantralaya D.K.S. Bhawan Raipur [C.G.] Chhattisgarh Board of Secondary Education Pension Bada, Raipur [C.G.] Director, Medical Education D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur [C.G.] PETITION UNDER ARTICLDE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF WRITS OF CERTIORARI AND MANDAMUS AND FURTHER WRITS AND DIRECTIONS. XI-HC-22 sn^i'qii 'feliSf? 3I1^¥I ^ltjt<t> vp^ ^ afliii-i 'a^r •-1-inwf, w\vie, hwwy. 3TI^T tR^? ..V>.:?;...t?.o...:..Aa-7.'7..."v^ 2oo' te^ST' wwir aiiicn 311^1 ^RIIW ^rfCT 16-09-2004 Shri SomnatTi Vcrma witH Devika Bhartf, Counsel for the P^1 Shri Viaod Shrivasta^a, State/responderits No. 1 and 3. Shri H.B. Agrawal, Coijnsel Dr. V.K. Gocl, Depiily SBcnitaiyJ Education. IIcaid on I.A.No.4645/20^4 coptes oftfae documents. Not opposed. The application is aUowedj iyped copies ofthe dociunents. IIcard, It is submltted by learaed| so far as Chbattisgarh Board of they acie purely coniputerized sheets nicely. So far as thc rcvaluatioa o) is concemed, in view of PramoO. Kumar Shrtpasteriw. of fhe judg^nent Supreme 134, there is no provi^ion ^il^tnql'T TTFT^ "^ ft^ ^^.K ^TsiPgii an^i Shri Sandcep niibey and Siishri ;titioner. Oovt, Advocate for fhc for respondent No.2 with Chhattisgarh Boanl ofSeconrlaiy for exciaption fiioni filing lypcd Exeiaption is grauted firipm filmg counsel for respondent No.2 that $econdaiy Educatton te conceraed, ilinrl have maintamed the answer (bc answcr shcct oftfac petitioncr ofthe Apcx Court m ttie case Vs. Cftainntin. Bffiar PulfUc Serrice Commfaston. Pdtnja. cind Others reportcd in_3004_^j rT^t-^T —^T^~r- [^JS) qi-iSs^ XI-HC-22 sn^r^T R-<i<* S^V ^HF^) ^f^T kiisiW '3^ •<<l<41cl<<, onl'a'Ka, Riwi'yy 3(T^T xraq? u-p- i°n? 1l*<CTIWWqi -•^ 200 t) i^^st' sii^i'?cgTWSrf??[ -I - <bl^(<'l4-t TWTCfftf fS^t iS^W. ^ arfigiT 3n^?r Since ttie order was Dasaled earUer on 04.9.2004, origuial book-lets (answer slicets) havc ^ieen liroiight in se-aled cover and produced. They are purefy coin^uterized. They were opened by the Depuly Sccretaiy ia thc prcscnc^ of counscl for fhc petitioner Shri Sonmatfa Verma, Sliri Sandeep |Dubey aud Sushri Devika Bhartl and the aaswer sheets have beeA. sfaown to them. Counsel for fhe pctitioncrs Sliri Somnath Verma Devika Bharti had aeen and nottjing hae been pointed out by fh.eiin. Thcy arcsatisficd. IIowcvcr, Stjri Dubcy madc a rcqucst that tfac petltioner is not preseat today, Thc praycr is vchcincnfly ^ Sliri Sandeep Diihey and SiisTiri she inay be pennitted to see the aaswer sheet aad the heariag in|ay be adjoumcd. It is stated that the petitioner Tiarl gone to Bang^tlore and could not coine because of dieruption iu trains, ete. opposcd by lcamcd couascl for respondent No.2 on tlie ground ^bat (hat tfae answer sheets are tfae confidential dociunents and thjey have toecn brought in seated cover by the Deputy Secrctaiy sdpd he is waittag siace niommg to produce fhese documents aad ^ursuant to Court direction, fhey havc becn shown to fhc counsc^ appcaring in fhc inatter aad fhey are fliUy satisfied. He stated th^t the Secretary may be attowcd to take back fhe answer shects a^ fhey are confidential docmnents aad be I'etumed to Wvn. It is ftuther subxiutted that the Deputy Secrefary cauaot st&y fturther be|ca'use fhe officer is required to do iaiportant jobs on bchalf of fhc Ejoaid. [°t»va^ XI-HC-22 T^f -'<l<<ldil, aTil'y'i®,facliyy SW^! 'WSR *<1*<CTI g,^|q,-—•••—••••••—•••'•••—•—•"••^p^ 200 (^ ' ^^T""""""""""""""""""'" sn^i^r h-fM sn^r SbHf^ ^ff^fl ®i ,,,,SEfi|F»ttlsB sn^i ^grw ^ifta -•'>- Retuni has been filed on ItehalfofBespoudeut no.2 iQ wliich it has hccn statcd that rbsiilt has been dcclarefi and couunxuucated to fhe individunp aad there ie no inalice or any partialily. In paragraphs 5,2 andj ^^ 5.2 'The question\ Annexure P-6 are gfven fn beingfile ffus cuuri on;r\ examinp.cf complete becccuse 19 to 22, 34, 61, 77 to 79, quesftons u'erje paper also menwry, not been Vfrongly oorrecd answei^ in asking oon/itSentiaf examinee cwiswers ure n prop^r marking only lahether oorreclly dois answerbooks fopography answer books numbers complete Therefore, becccuse ihere and the quest^sn. are hept blanUj by ^T^t<n''ft'T ^fiHv^ '4 T^^ ^•^i't, ^3lf:aII 311^1 5.6 it has bccn stated as zuidcr; \paper recalled fram memoray as fe no( correri because bubble marks <he answer sheet an the sccme is »"nseale couer in pursucmce of |ute 06.9.2004 ari 13.9.200-f, ttie ilrtitionrr has rmt answeit' thf aske in the paper of Physics ofguestimt rw.3 to 7, 15 to 17. j?7, 42 to 46, 48, 52 to 55, 57, 58, to 84, 90, 96 and 100 (totalof37 not attemptej, likewiae in other has not orw wxording fo ker in Chermstry 2 questions have 3, while 40 quesfa'ons were ccrtd she aecured m.ccrks for 58 therefore, the oourts should slow of ccnswerbooks which are seavt like baRot paper and the be discauraged. sirwe the ijtu( is3!pluruth)ry, but based on ckil ^md tkf imly things arc. to he seen. dote iffere macfe or no( and were made or not beoause the jnre put in topo macfane and by meihod of thrawing light in from glciss cmd getting scccrmedthe given by scccmung, which is and computerized method). »s no malice and parliality »s no involvenwnt of man power not attempted in answer books ihe exa.minee/pefitioTter hersetf herdtuith p^titioi quesfions ctnsu/ers fi|2 sffie beoaiiae att^mpte, artstokred re-tipening culid sh^uld (n^eans ther^by mec?iani'cu? tWre [TTtE?tR3^ XI-HC-22 T°? •^iiici'M, d'd1y'i<», fawi'yy 3TT^?T XRra? P-f- I^T; wiwaiiira;"""""""""""""""""""'^ 20P *i 'fgre^g' sn^i^r K-U* 3^1 ?hH 'Mf?a .'H^ii^t^g? »?iEESSS*f! 'k'.f sn^i ^giw^rf^l 'l-f- otfier mearts and not by + IcKha examinee tn.it\ interfered by pariksha but (he inteiferend^ assessindrd S.6 Self. petition and swrmwned <wver, luokiru/\ imiolves n.o iopography the notice Hoiuever it ia wastage of therefore, precffous oompensa(ed thccl revalualio^t petiti which cuiln oottrts So far as the hearing docuinents have already beea niade out in view of fhe judgnie^t Kuniar Shrivastava (supra). seen by counsel and aone has ,ao aUcgcd byAhe^etitieasr Since fhe aaswer sheets these aaswer sheets are sealed itakcn ia or^kial. ^Tqfe^ HlH^ll*^ Fs^ <f^«l< ^siPgqsn^i mccn. Pariksha (in Sanskrii Par no< the will and whnn of the tlw examiner, if such a Uung is the Courts then it will no( be '( will become students Ichha with ofCowi)' »s the only ground fov fiVng ihe the answer book has been is being .produced in seated |fc> fhe nusttusd <if vtihiulwn, whictt tnanning ejmp.pt operator of computer machine ordy, therefore A^inexure P-11, is rwt disputed. \aubmitted that she is making the time by cdtling answer book, ffme of Court be adeqwxtely py imposing exemplccry oosts, so io^t petitions can be discourciged thc matter is concemed. the sbown. No case fiar revaluatioa is of the suprexne Coiirt iu Praniod H<twcvcr, sincc it has alrcady bccn tnitfcfedT". .. to.polnt out/manipulation btea tia.ve beea shown to the counsel, by fhe Office^aad they naay be L'qrs ?rss XI-HC-22 sn^r'qiT (c[-li.+ OT^t ^HW y(in l"l:!"ijti^ .t"^' ^ TS[ -i|i4l<yf''l, »ifly']s,I'Kii'yy sni?r "q^? . A->.'.&...^72........... .„.,. *11*1CTI g^Eg-——-—••—-———-—g^ 200 1q^?I' an^t ?^giw ^ri??[ -5- Ihe aitswcr pettqoner Now tearacd coiuisel tbr that the petitioner may he aIIowiE^i Office offhe Board. So feir as showing tfac prayed by couasel for the that fhe petitiouer is represent^d dociiments have been showm tn like to issue suiv direction. to howcvcr, lcft to thc Doard to pefltloner aiakes an appUcation filed, it shaU be open to thc her, Accordiagly, the petition Conscquentfy, M.W.P.No. 11 C.C. as per rules. shcets to fhc pctitioncr as is concenned, suffice to say ttuough ttie counsel aad the the coTinsel, this Coiirt woiild not Board for that purpose. It is, dtcal wifh fhc inattcr ia casc fhc |and on such an appUcation bemg to show the aaswer sheete to ttie shl'i|I<'l''i1-1 4|t|dI'?fsTA <f»l<$l< ^sifigitsn^i petitioner made a submission to see the answcr papers in the Botad stbnds disposed of. 78/2004 also staads disposcd of. Sd/- e