Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)

For The vs State Of West Bengal on 27 September, 2013

Author: Sambuddha Chakrabarti

Bench: Sambuddha Chakrabarti

27.09.13                       W. P. No. 12895(W) of 2013
sk

                          Mrs. Tanuja Basak
                                     ...for the petitioner.

                     Mr. Raghunath Chakraborty
                     Ms. T. Das
                                 ...for the Burdwan University.

The petitioner had appeared at the B.SC, Part-II Examination in the year 2011 from the Burdwan University. She was not satisfied with the marks obtained in the 3rd paper, she filed an application for re-examination of the answer-scripts. By the re-examination result, she did not see any alteration of marks. After taking an inspection of the answer-scripts under the Right to Information Act, the petitioner found that her marks had been reduced.

According to her, she did well in the examination and she prays for appointment of a third examiner for further re-examination of the answer-scripts by a third examiner and for other reliefs.

Her prayer is not entertainable as the petitioner's reduction of marks, if any, was done by the competent authority from the answer- scripts annexed to the writ petition. It appears that two marks once awarded have been taken away with initial by the competent persons.

Moreover, even if, there was a reduction in marks that was before the re-examination was done.

Mrs. Basak, learned Advocate for the petitioner has referred to the Division Bench judgment in the case of Abheri Mukherjee vs. State of West Bengal, reported in 2012(1)CHN(Cal) 1994 where the Division Bench of this Court directed a further re-examination of the answer-scripts, after it was once re-examined. This case, however, does not apply to the facts of this present writ petition, inasmuch as there was a specific finding that at the time of the re-examination, the re-examiner had not followed the instruction issued by the University 1 of Calcutta.

2

3