Madhya Pradesh High Court
Sonam Yadav vs Central Board Of Secondary Education ... on 8 January, 2016
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, PRINCIPAL SEAT
AT JABALPUR.
W.P. No.15322/2015
Sonam
Vs.
Central Board of Secondary Education
Present: For Petitioner : Shri Vijit Sahu, Advocate.
For Respondent: Rajesh Maindiretta, Advocate.
(Order) 08.01.2016 Per : Justice Sujoy Paul In this petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed for issuance of direction to the respondent/Board to revaluate the answer sheet of the subject Mathematics (Subject Code 041). It is further prayed to issue direction to award appropriate marks to the petitioner on the basis of Model Answer.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner by drawing attention of this Court on Marksheet (Annexure P/1) contended that the petitioner has received good marks in all the subjects except Mathematics. This apparently shows that copies of Mathematics were not properly evaluated. No other point is raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner.
3. The prayer is opposed by learned counsel for the other side. The respondent by filing return contended that there is a procedure prescribed for the purpose of verification of marks etc. There exists a three stage system of verification of marks, as described in Para 3 of the return. Learned counsel for the respondent/Board contended that as per the Rules/By-laws, the answer sheets have been destroyed after the stipulated period. Reliance is placed on Annexure R/5.
4. The question is whether any direction can be issued for revaluation of the answer sheets in the facts of present case. The petitioner has not chosen to file the copy of the answer sheet. A Division Bench of this Court in 2014 (3) MPLJ 147 (Dheeraj Pandey and another vs State of M.P.) has held that unless a prima- facie case is made out to show that answer sheets were not valued properly, merely on the basis of vague and unspecified allegations, no direction can be issued to revaluate the answer sheets. This Court opined that the student should apply and obtain the copy of answer sheet and then demonstrate about illegality in the matter of evaluation. In absence thereof, no mandamus can be issued. The petitioner has not filed any material to show that evaluation of answer sheet in the subject of Mathematics was improper or arbitrary. Merely, because the petitioner has got more marks in other subjects, it cannot be presumed that his answer sheet in the subject of Mathematics was improperly evaluated. This is a matter of common knowledge that a student may be good in other subjects but may be weak in the subject of Mathematics. In other words, there is no presumption that if a student has got good marks in other subjects, he should get good marks in Mathematics as well.
5. In view of the aforesaid analysis, the petitioner has failed to make out a case. In the absence of production of copy of Mathematics, no interference can be made by this Court. Hence, the petition fails and is hereby dismissed.
(Sujoy Paul) Judge mohsin/