Tripura High Court
Tathagata Chakraborty vs The State Of Tripura And Ors on 7 January, 2021
Bench: S. Talapatra, S. G. Chattopadhyay
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
AGARTALA
WA No.28 of 2020
Tathagata Chakraborty
----Appellant(s)
Versus
The State of Tripura and Ors.
----Respondent(s)
For Appellant(s) : Mr. S. M. Chakraborty, Sr. Adv.
Ms. A. Pal, Adv.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. D. Bhattacharya, G.A. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. TALAPATRA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. G. CHATTOPADHYAY Order 07/01/2021 Heard Mr. S. M. Chakraborty, learned senior counsel assisted by Ms. A. Pal, learned counsel appearing for the appellant as well as Mr. D. Bhattacharya, learned G.A. appearing for the respondents.
By means of this inter-court appeal, the appellant has challenged the order dated 10.01.2020 passed by learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) No.912 of 2019. The appellant appeared in the final examination of H.S.(+2) stage examination conducted by the Tripura Board of Secondary Education, TBSE in short, in the year 2018. The result of the said examination was declared on May, 2018. 2
The appellant being dissatisfied with the evaluation of answer scripts prayed for reassessment/review of Biology, Chemistry and Mathematics. Even he had approached the TBSE for physical inspection of his answer scripts and the appellant was afforded that opportunity. In the writ petition, the appellant has only asserted as follows:
"The respondents completely failed to discharge the legal obligation as well as deprived the future prospect of the petitioner and the petitioner expects that if an independent body scrutinizes his answer sheet, he will definitely get higher marks. Unless and until the answer sheets are scrutinized in all stages like evaluation, marking and tabulation, the petitioner will seriously prejudiced. The right of the petitioner has been flagrantly violated and also the rights under Article 14, 19, 21 & 300A of the Constitution of India has been violated."
On the basis of that the reliefs were framed. The appellant has urged this court to examine, scrutinize and evaluate properly the answer scripts by an independent body and scrutinize the same for providing appropriate marks in the said examination.
Learned Single Judge having taken all those grounds into consideration, disposed the writ petition by the order dated 10.01.2020 on observing thus:
"The request of the petitioner cannot be granted. Rechecking or reassessment of the answer sheets of a student can only be done as per the Rules framed by the examining body. The petitioner was granted rechecking of his papers and to the extent errors were noticed, the same were corrected and supplementary mark sheet issued. There is no rule pointed out to me which would permit even internal reevaluation by the School Board itself. The request of the petitioner is one step away. The answer sheets are evaluated by an independent body which simply cannot be ordered."3
On such observation, the writ petition was dismissed. Mr. S. M. Chakraborty, learned senior counsel has, apart from the grounds those were taken before learned Single Judge, submitted that the loose sheet as used by the appellant was not found with the answer scripts when the petitioner had physically inspected the answer scripts.
We have checked the entire writ petition but such averments are not available in the writ petition.
The petitioner has brought some extraneous materials to question the process of evaluation by TBSE. Even such allegations are not based on any records.
Situated thus, we do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned order dated 10.01.2020 and accordingly, the appeal stands dismissed.
Interlocutory application, if any, stands disposed of.
JUDGE JUDGE Moumita