Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side)
Barnashis Roy vs The State Of West Bengal & Anr on 13 February, 2018
Author: Tapabrata Chakraborty
Bench: Tapabrata Chakraborty
1 13.02.2018 Item No.5 ad W.P. No. 564 (W) of 2018 Barnashis Roy
- Versus -
The State of West Bengal & Anr.
Mr. P.K Pakrashi,
Ms. Nasreen Islam
... For the petitioner
Mr. Jahar Datta
... For the State
Mr. Biswarup Bhattacharyya,
Mr. Tanay Chakraborty
.... For the H.S Council
Affidavit of service filed by the petitioner be kept on record. Mr. Pakrashi, learned advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner appeared in the Higher Secondary Examination, 2017 and upon publication of the results, he was shocked to learn that he had been awarded only 41 marks in Chemistry theory paper. The petitioner expected much more marks in the said paper as he had answered all the questions following the text books prescribed by the West Bengal Council of Higher Secondary Education (in short, the said Council). Accordingly, he submitted an application for post publication scrutiny and upon consideration of the same, the said Council intimated him that there had been no change in the marks pertaining to the subject of Chemistry. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner sought for the answer scripts of the Chemistry paper by submitting an application under the Right to Information Act, 2005. In response to the said application, the answer script of 2 the Chemistry paper was supplied to the petitioner. Upon going through the answer-script, the petitioner felt that the examiner has not granted him appropriate marks in Chemistry paper and as such, he approached this Court praying for issuance of necessary direction upon the concerned authorities to re- evaluate his answer-script.
Such contention of Mr. Pakrashi has, however, been disputed by Mr. Bhattacharyya, learned advocate appearing for the said Council and he submits that there is no provision towards re-evaluation of the answer-script, as prayed for by the petitioner.
It is well settled that the Writ Court shall not sit in appeal over the assessment made by the examiner. There is also no provision towards re- evaluation of the answer-script.
In the said conspectus, this Court is reluctant to exercise any discretion in favour of the petitioner and the writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed There shall, however, be no order as to costs.
Urgent photostat certified copy of this order be supplied to the parties on compliance of all formalities.
(Tapabrata Chakraborty, J.)