IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 1ST JUNE 2010 / 11TH JYAISTHA 1932 WP(C).No. 33368 of 2007(V) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- 1. MARY JASMINE.M.D., PIDIYATH HOUSE, NENMANIKKARA, PUDUKKAD P.O., THRISSUR-680 301. (WORKING AS LOWER DIVISION CLERK, DISTRICT REGISTRAR (GENERAL) OFFICE, THRISSUR). 2. RAJESH.K, "KRISHNA KRIPA", MADHAVA MENON ROAD, VETTIKKAL, MANNUTHY P.O., THRISSUR 680 651. (WORKING AS LOWER DIVISION CLERK, SUB REGISTRAR OFFICE, THRISSUR). 3. SMITHA PANIKKER, KALARIKKAL HOUSE, VENKITANGU P.O., THRISSUR 680 510. (WORKING AS LOWER DIVISION CLERK, SUB REGISTRAR OFFICE, KOTTAPPADI). 4. MINI.E.S., THANDIAKAL HOUSE, ANTHIKKAD P.O., THRISSUR 680 641, (WORKING AS LOWER DIVISION CLERK, DISTRICT REGISTRAR (GENERAL) OFFICE, THRISSUR) BY ADV. SRI.O.D.SIVADAS RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. THE KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE SECRETARY, KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV. SRI.ALEXANDER THOMAS,SC,KPSC FOR R1 & 2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 33368 OF 2007 (V) ===================== Dated this the 1st day of June, 2010 J U D G M E N T Petitioners are candidates who appeared for the examination held by the PSC with respect to the Kerala Registration Test-Part I Paper I. 2. In this writ petition, the grievance of the petitioners is that going by the answers to the questions framed by the PSC, they ought to have secured higher marks and that due to erroneous valuation, lower marks were awarded, as a result of which, they were not included in the select list prepared. 3. PSC on the other hand filed counter affidavit explaining the answers given, marks awarded, cut off marks prescribed and that as the petitioners secured only marks lower to the cut off marks prescribed. It is stated that it was therefore that they were not included in the select list. It is in these circumstances, petitioners are seeking a direction from this Court requiring the PSC to produce the answer papers and get the answer papers valued by an external expert. 4. Petitioners have no case that there is any Regulation of WPC No. 33368/07 :2 : the PSC providing for revaluation of the answer scripts. It is the settled position of law that in the absence of a regulation providing for revaluation, Courts cannot order revaluation of the answer scripts. It has been so held in the Apex Court judgment in Civil Appeal No.461/08 concerning the PSC itself. In that view of the matter the prayer for revaluation sought for by the petitioners cannot be granted. 5. The other grievance of the petitioners is that they sought disclosure of the answer sheets by making an application invoking the Right to Information Act which was also denied. It is now pointed out by the counsel for the PSC that a similar order rejecting the request made by another applicant was rejected by the Calicut University and that was subject matter of WP(C) No.9445/09 and that this court by judgment dated 28th October, 2009 has upheld the order of the Calicut University. In that view of the matter, I do not see any merit in this writ petition and accordingly it is dismissed. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp