IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No.1174 of 2010 (M/S) Vibha Budakoti (Minor) .…Petitioner Versus Board of School Education, Uttarakhand ...Respondent Mr. Navnish Negi, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. N.S. Negi, Advocate for the respondent. Hon’ble V.K. Bist, J. Present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner for the following reliefs:- i. Issue a writ, rule, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the respondent to produce the examination copy of the petitioner enrolled as roll no.047600 of English, Chemistry, Physics and Mathematics subjects before this Hon’ble Court or to re- examine/reevaluate the same. ii. Issue a writ, rule order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the respondent to scrutinize the examination copy of the petitioner having roll no. as 047600 of the English, Chemistry, Physics and Mathematics subjects of the petitioner. iii. Issue any writ, rule order or direction which this Hon’ble court may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case. iv. Award cost of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner appeared in Intermediate Examination, 2010 with the subjects Hindi, English, Mathematics, Physics and Chemistry from Inter College Kutiyakhal, Pauri Garhwal. Her roll number was 047600. 2 Contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner is a student of Class XII and she is an extra ordinary student. In class X Examination she secured more than 71% marks in Board Examination. In Class XII examination she did her papers very well but marks awarded to her are less than her expectation. Therefore, she applied for scrutiny and deposited the required fee. Learned counsel for the petitioner prayed that in these circumstances the answer sheets of the petitioner be revalued. This prayer of the petitioner cannot be allowed in view of the fact that there is no rule which provides revaluation and also in view of the law laid down in the judgment of Hon’ble Apex Court reported in (1984)4 Supreme Court Cases 27, Maharashtra State Board of Secondary and Higher Secondary Education vs. Paritosh Bhupeshkumar Seth & Others. However, since the petitioner has applied for the scrutiny and deposited the required fee in time, respondent is directed to scrutinize the answer sheets of the petitioner expeditiously, preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of production of certified copy of the order. The writ petition is disposed of. Interim Relief Application No.5499 of 2010 also stands disposed of. (V.K.Bist. J,) 09.07.2010 Arti 3