Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

"Under the relevant rules of the Commission, there is no provision wherein a candidate may be entitled to ask for re-evalution of his answer-book. There is a provision for scrutiny only wherein the answer- books are seen for the purpose of checking whether all the answers given by a candidate have been examined and whether there has been any mistake in the totaling of marks of each question and noting them correctly on the first cover page of the answer-book. There is no dispute that after scrutiny no mistake was found in the marks awarded to the appellant in the General Science paper. In the absence of any provision for re-valuation of answer- books in the relevant rules, no candidate in an examination has got any right whatsoever to claim or ask for re-valuation of his marks."

128. Sri J. Sudheer, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners contended that, when the rules does not provide rechecking or re-valuation of answer scripts, the re-valuation of papers or valuation for more than one time is a violation of statutory provision. In support of the contention, learned counsel placed reliance on the judgment of the Apex Court H.P.Public Service Commission vs Mukesh Thakur21, wherein the Court held as follows:

"24. The issue of re-valuation of answer book is no more res integra. This issue was considered at length by this Court in Maharashtra State Board of Secondary and Higher Secondary Education & Anr. Vs. Paritosh Bhupesh Kurmarsheth etc.etc. AIR 1984 SC 1543, wherein this Court rejected the contention that in absence of provision for re-valuation, a direction to this effect can be issued by the Court. The Court further held that even the policy decision incorporated in the Rules/Regulations not providing for rechecking/verification/re-valuation cannot be challenged unless there are grounds to show that the policy itself is in violation of some statutory provision. The Court held as under:

25. This view has been approved and relied upon and re-iterated by this Court in Pramod Kumar Srivastava Vs. Chairman, Bihar Public Service Commission, Patna & Ors, AIR 2004 SC 4116 observing as under:

"Under the relevant rules of the Commission, there is no provision wherein a candidate may be entitled to ask for re- valuation of his answer-book. There is a provision for scrutiny only wherein the answer- books are seen for the purpose of checking whether all the answers given by a candidate have been examined and whether there has been any mistake in the totalling of marks of each question and noting them correctly on the first cover page of the answer-book. There is no dispute that after scrutiny no mistake was found in the marks awarded to the appellant in the General Science paper. In the absence of any provision for re- valuation of answer-books in the relevant rules, no candidate in an examination has got any right whatsoever to claim or ask for re-valuation of his marks." (emphasis added)

130. In Dr. NTR University of Health Sciences Vs. Dr. Yerra Trinadh & Ors22, the question before the Hon'ble Supreme Court was "whether in the absence of any provision for re-valuation, the High Court was justified in ordering re-valuation after calling for the record of the answer scripts?. The Hon'ble Apex Court while reiterating the principle laid down in Pramod Kumar Srivastava v. Chairman, Bihar Public Service Commission, Patna & Others (referred supra) and the recent decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Vikesh Kumar Gupta & Another v. State of Rajasthan & Others23 held that, the Court should not re-evaluate or scrutinise the answer sheets of a candidate as it has no expertise in the matter and the academic matters are best left to academics and thereby, the order of revaluation is illegal and set-aside the same, while allowing the appeals.