IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.11953 of 2008 SUSHIL KUMAR MISHRA, SON OF SRI KAMESHWAR MISHRA, RESIDENT OF TEACHER’S COLONY PURNIA, P.O. PURNIA, P.S. KHAJHACHI HAT DISTRICT – PURNIA. ………. PETITIONER. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE SECRETARY, HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, VIKASH BHAWAN, PATNA. 2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF BIHAR, VIKASH BHAWAN, PATNA. 3. THE BIHAR SCHOOL EXAMINATION BOARD, THROUGH ITS SECRETARY, PATNA. 4. THE CHAIRMAN, BIHAR SCHOOL EXAMINATION BOARD, PATNA. 5. THE SECRETARY, BIHAR SCHOOL EXAMINATION BOARD, PATNA. 6. THE DIRECTOR, S.C.E.R.T., P.O. MAHENDRU, DISTRICT – PATNA. 7. THE PRINCIPAL-CUM-INTERNAL, TEACHERS TRAINING COLLEGE, KISHANGANJ. 8. SRI SHAMBHU NATH SHARMA, FATHER’S NAME NOT KNOWN, THE THEN INCHARGE PRINCIPAL, PRIMARY TEACHER’S TRAINING COLLEGE, KISHANGANJ, AT PRESENT POSTED AS LECTURER, PRIMARY TEACHER’S TRAINING COLLEGE, SRINAGAR, DISTRICT – PURNIA. 9. SRI BIRENDRA NARAYAN SINGH, FATHER’S NAME NOT KNOWN, THE THEN LECTURER, PRIMARY TEACHER’S TRAINING COLLEGE KISHANGANJ, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE – SUNPURA, P.O. SUNPURA, DISTRICT – SAHARSA. 10. SRI BINEY KUMAR MANDAL FATHER’S NAME NOT KNOWN, THE THEN LECTURER, PRIMARY TEACHER’S TRAINING COLLEGE SRINAGAR, AT PRESENT POSTED AS LECTURER PRIMARY TEACHER’S TRAINING COLLEGE, SRINAGAR. 11. ALI AHMAD, FATHER’S NAME NOT KNOWN, LECTURER, PRIMARY TEACHER’S TRAINING COLLEGE, KISHANGANJ. …. RESPONDENTS. ----------- 02/ 26.03.2010 Heard counsels for the petitioner and Bihar School Examination Board. This application has been filed by the petitioner for quashing of the order passed by the Chairman, Bihar School - 2 - Examination Board contained in Memo No. 442 (Patna) dated 24.6.2008, whereby representation filed by the petitioner in the light of the order passed in C.W.J.C. No. 4329 of 2008, for making correction in the mark-sheet of the petitioner in VIIth paper (Internal Evaluation) of Teacher’s Training Examination of Session 1998-99 has been rejected. Further prayer of the petitioner is for a direction to the respondent-authorities to make correction in the mark-sheet of petitioner’s VIIth paper (Internal Evaluation) and publish result maintaining it’s date as June 30th, 2006. Petitioner was an examinee of the Teacher’s Training Examination Session 1998-99 and allotted Roll Code 1102, Roll No. 196. His case is that he got 16 marks out of 30 marks in VIIth paper (Internal Evaluation) but due to inadvertence only 10 marks were shown in the mark- sheet in the Internal Evaluation of VIIth paper, as such he was declared fail in the examination. He approached the Principal of Training College, Kishanganj, who after proper verification sent letter No. 43 dated 7.7.2005 to Secretary, Bihar School Examination Board for rectifying the error. Since nothing was done at the level of Bihar School - 3 - Examination Board, C.W.J.C. No. 4329 of 2008 was filed by the petitioner. After disposal of the writ application, Bihar School Examination Board issued notice to the External Evaluator of the examination and the Principal of the College, but other members were not noticed, who had signed the mark-sheet. The Chairman, Bihar School Examination without properly verifying the connected records has passed the impugned order, rejecting the claim of the petitioner for rectification of the error in the mark- sheet. Counter affidavit filed by the Chairman, Bihar School Examination Board indicates that the standard marks sent by the Convener of the External Evaluation Committee indicated that petitioner has obtained only 10 marks in VIIth paper (Internal Evaluation). So far request made by the Principal in his letter no. 43 dated 7.7.2005 is concerned, it could not have been considered as the same would have created hurdle in preparation and publication of the result. It is also stated that as per the direction of this Court in the writ application, a proper order has been passed after hearing the parties and after considering the materials - 4 - presented before the Chairman by the petitioner and the Principal, Teacher’s Training College. Counsel appearing for Bihar School Examination Board has also submitted that under the rules there is no provision for re-evaluation but only for re-calculation. In similar matters, earlier the Bihar School Examination Board had rejected such claim made by other candidates. The representation filed by the petitioner has also been rejected. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not feel inclined to interfere in this matter. This application is dismissed. DKS/ (Mridula Mishra, J.)