Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Md. Arsad Ali vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 16 April, 2019
Author: Shampa Sarkar
Bench: Shampa Sarkar
16.4.2019 Court No. 19 Item No. 4 Ashoke W.P. 7800(W) of 2019 Md. Arsad Ali
-versus-
The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Mr. Saibal Acharya, Mr. Probal Sarkar.
... For the Petitioner.
Mr. R.N. Dutta, Ms. Saheli Mukherjee.
... For the State.
Mr. Prosenjit Mukherjee, Ms. Madhurima Sarkar.
... For the Madrasah Service Commission.
In this writ petition, the petitioner is aggrieved by evaluation of the answer script in the 6th SLST examination held by the West Bengal Madrasah Service Commission. The petitioner applied under the Right to Information Act, 2005 for supply of his answer script. A copy of the answer script was supplied to the petitioner on February 21, 2019. The petitioner has filed this writ petition praying for re-evaluation of the answer script.
However, from the pleadings I do not find any averment as to why the petitioner is aggrieved either by the total evaluation or by the question-wise evaluation. No such case has been made out by the petitioner. It is a settled principle of law that re-evaluation of answer scripts cannot be directed by the Court unless the same is exclusively provided in the examination rules. In this regard Court refers to the decision of the Apex Court in Ran Vijay Singh & Ors. -vs- State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors., reported in 2018(2) SCC 367. In the said judgement it has been inter alia laid down as follows:-
"30.2 If a Statute, Rule or Regulation governing an examination does not permit re-evaluation or scrutiny of an answer sheet (as distinct from prohibiting it) then the court may permit re-evaluation or scrutiny only if it is demonstrated very clearly, without any "inferential process of reasoning or by a process of rationalization" and only in rare or exceptional cases that a material error has been committed."
Unless the Court is satisfied that in absence of the rules permitting re- evaluation, the examining body marked the petitioner unfairly or committed serious mistake in the marking process, the Court cannot direct the authorities to re-evaluate the answer scripts.
If the petitioner is aggrieved and can point out any serious irregularity in the marking process, then the petitioner is always at liberty to approach the authority and the authority will act and proceed in accordance with law on the basis of the contention, if any made by the petitioner. However, this Court in judicial review cannot entertain this writ petition.
This writ petition is disposed of with the above observation.
There will be no order as to costs.
Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the parties as expeditiously as possible.
(Shampa Sarkar, J.) 1 2