IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR THURSDAY, THE 18TH JANUARY 2007 / 28TH PAUSHA 1928 WP(C).No. 31115 of 2006(D) ------------------------------------------ PETITIONER: -------------------- NIRMAL KUMAR.R., REP.BY GUARDIAN P.V.RAVI, S/O.M.P.NARAYANAN NAIR, TEACHER, "CHAITHANYA", EDAPPAZHASSI, URUVACHAL P.O., KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.CIBI THOMAS RESPONDENTS: ------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY SECRETARY, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE COMMISSIONER FOR GOVERNMENT EXAMINATIONS, PAREEKSHA BHAVAN, POOJAPPURA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.I.V.PRAMOD THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/01/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C)NO.31115 OF 2006 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 18th day of January 2007 JUDGMENT Petitioner is challenging the marks awarded to him in SSLC Hindi examination. Specific case of the petitioner is that in some questions no mark is awarded and in some other questions petitioner is not awarded the mark which he deserves to get. However, Government Pleader reported that the original mark awarded to the petitioner was only 35 and on revaluation by two valuers petitioner got an increase of three marks making it 38. Obviously, omission would have been made up in revaluation because petitioner has got three marks more. The omission is admittedly only in respect of award of one mark in question no.1 in the original valuation. In the circumstances, since the petitioner has got three marks more in the revaluation, there is no scope for interference and writ petition is dismissed. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE jes