k9 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR v WRIT PETITION (C) No. 5373 of'2008 : * h PETITIONERS 1. Shalini Agrawal, D/o Rajkumar Agrawal, aged about 19 yeam, R/o Kharsiya, District Raigarh (C.G.). 2. Ankur Sahu, S/o Sutesh kumar, aged about 19 yeam: R/o Kharsiya, District Raigarh (C.G.) 3. Krishna Shanna D/o Vijay Shanna aged about 19 years, R/o Kharsiya, District Raigarh (C.G.) 4. Asgar Ali Manihax S/o Sattar Ali Manih’ar, aged about 20 years, R/o Anjoripali, Kharsiya, Distn‘ct Raigarh (C.G.) 5. Sandeep Agrawal S/o Rajkumar Agrawal, aged about 2O year's, R/o Kharsiya, District Raigar (C.G.) ‘VERSUS . Chaixman, Chhattisgarh Madhyamik Shjksha- Mandal, Raipur, District - Raipur (C.G.) ‘ 2. Secretary, Chhattisgarh Madhyamik Shiksha Mandal, Raipur, Dishict Raipur (C.G.)‘, ’ 3. Principal, Kamla Nehu Public ‘Schoai, Kharsiya, District — Raigarh (C.G.) 4. Principal, Vandemataram Higher Secondary School, Thaimrdiya, Kharsiyaa District Raigarh (C.G.) RESPONDENTS WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF DIDIA SB : Hon’ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri. J. Present: Shri F. S. Khare, Advocate for the petitioners. Shri R. S. Pate}, Advocate for the respondents No. 1 and 2. Shn' Amen Kesherwani, Advocate for the respondent No.3. ORAL ORDER (Passed on 20th day of January, 2009) The petitioners-students seek a writ/order to quash the impugied memo dated 21.7.2008 (Annexure P/2) whereby the Higher Secondary school Certificate Examination, 2003 was cancelled, consequently,_the results thereof was withheld on account ofmass copying. The indisputable facts, in brief, as projected by the petitioners are that the petitioners are the students of class XII‘h (Science) who appeared in the Higher Secondary School Certif1cate Examination, 2008. The ’ <§§ examination was held on 29.02.2002 to 13.03.2008. Vandematram Higher Secondary School Thakurdia Kharsiya (Raigarh) was the examination centre for the students of XII‘“. The results of class XII‘h were declared in the last week of May, 2008 but the results of the petitioners were withheld by impugned memo dated 21.7.2008 (Annexure P/2). It was held that pursuant to the decision of the Examination and the Results Committee. held on 25.6.2008, mass copying was reported and found, therefore, the results were withheld. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents submit that the facts and question of law involved in the present petition are similar to that of in W.P.(C) No. 5353/2008 (Umashankar & others Vs. >The Chairman, Chhattisgarh Madhyamik Shiksha Mandal, Raipur & others), decided‘by this Court on 5.12.2008. 4. Thus, this petition is also dismissed in view ofthe order dated 5.12.2008 passed in W.P.(C) No. 5353/2008 (supra). However, m the facts and circumstances of the case, it is desirable that the respondent-Board shall conduct reexamination, as early as possible to save the time of the students. No order asto costs. r ‘ Sdl- . Satish K. Agnihosri .' Judge