IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 17TH AUGUST 2011 / 26TH SRAVANA 1933 WP(C).No. 20574 of 2011(V) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- MANU CHANDRAN, S/O.CHANDRAN, MINOR AGED 16 YEARS, REP.BY HIS MOTHER AND GUARDIAN BEENA CHANDRAN, CHITHIRA, THAMARAKKULAM P.O., ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT BY ADVS. SRI.GEORGE VARGHESE(PERUMPALLIKUTTIYIL) SRI.A.R.DILEEP RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- 1. UNION OF INDIA REP.BY SECREARY, MINISTRY OF HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT, CENTRAL SECRETARIAT, NEW DELHI-001 2. COUNCIL FOR INDIAN SCHOOL CERTIFICAE EXAMINATIONS, PRAGATHI HOUSE, 3RD FLOOR, 47-48,NEHRU PLACE, NEW DELHI-110019 3. ST.JOSEPH'S CONVENT ENGLISH MEDIUM SCHOOL, PARAYAMKULAM L.S.P.O., ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-688001 R-1 BY ADV. SRI.A.SUDHI VASUDEVAN,SENIOR PANEL COUN R2 BY ADV. SRI.V.V.RAJA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs W.P.(C). NO. 20574/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1: COPY OF THE RESULT OF THE ICSE EXAM DECLARED ON 17/05/2011. P2: COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION OF RECHECK RESULT DATED 17/06/2011. P3: COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE 3RFD RESPONDENT ON 15/07/2011. P4: COPY OF THE REGULATIONS OF ICSE EXAMINATION. P5: COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 29/07/2011 MADE TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE. svs ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ---------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 20574 OF 2011 ----------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 17th day of August , 2011 J U D G M E N T Petitioner was a student of 3rd respondent, School which is affiliated to the 2nd respondent. His grievance is that in the 10th Std. while awarding marks for the paper English, the internal assessment marks were excluded. It is alleged that complaining of the above, representations were made and that the representations were also not attended to. 2. A statement has been filed by the counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent. It is stated that for English paper I, the petitioner scored 10 marks for external examination and 19 marks for internal assessment. It is also stated that for paper II, the petitioner secured 5 marks for external examination and 19 marks were awarded for internal assessment. It is stated W.P.(C) No. 20574 OF 2011 :2 : that thus he secured a total of 53 marks out of 200 and that it was also stated that if the marks secured by the petitioner is worked out the percentage of marks will be 27% which was standardized as 29%. A perusal of Ext.P1, a certificate issued by the 2nd respondent shows that the percentage of marks awarded is consistent with what is now disclosed in the statement. Thus the facts as disclosed from the statement filed by the respondent rules out the possibility of any mistake as apprehended by the petitioner. Therefore the writ petition only deserves to be rejected and I do so. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE ul/-