HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.4028 of 2010 Dated: 04-03-2010 Between: Sri. K.Thirumal. … Petitioner And Andhra Pradesh Public Service Commission, Nampally, Hyderabad, rep. by its Secretary. … Respondent HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION No.4028 of 2010 ORDER: In this writ petition, the petitioner, who is working as a Teacher, seeks declaration by way of Mandamus, declaring the action of respondent in not conducting fair valuation of his answer papers, as arbitrary and illegal, and consequently, to direct the respondent to produce his answer papers in respect of “The Accounts Test for Executive Officers (141) (with books)”. 2. The petitioner has appeared for Departmental test in May 2008 Session, conducted by the respondent-Andhra Pradesh Public Service Commission, on 22nd August 2009. The said test was conducted in pursuance of Notification No.5/2009, dated 10.06.2009, and the petitioner appeared for the test with Registration No.12405166. In this writ petition, it is the case of the petitioner that as he wrote the examination well, he is expecting good result, but to his shock, he was not successful in the test, and therefore, he presumes that the valuation of answer papers was not done fairly. On the aforesaid ground, he seeks directions for revaluation of his answer papers. 3. The petitioner has not placed any Regulation or Terms in the Notification, to show that there is a provision for revaluation of answer papers. It is well settled now, that in the absence of any specific provision for revaluation, this Court cannot issue any directions for revaluation. Further, on instructions, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent-Public Service Commission also states that there is no provision for revaluation, and further, there is no basis for the apprehension of the petitioner. Except his own assessment, there is no other material to show that the valuation of petitioner’s answer papers was not done properly. Further, in the absence of any provision for revaluation, I do not find any merit to entertain this writ petition. 4. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. ______________________ R. SUBHASH REDDY, J 4th March 2010 ajr