Skip to main content
Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law
Document Fragment View
Matching Fragments
59. Submissions made by Mr. Mitra that
since regulations framed by the University and
the WBBSE entitle an examinee to ask for
review/reassessment and/or scrutiny of his
answer scripts access thereto under the RTI Act
would not serve any fruitful purpose is again
without merit. It is common knowledge that
while the entire answer script is reevaluated on
merits in case of review, scrutiny is limited only
to ascertain whether marks have been
awarded for each question answered and
whether there is any totalling error or not.
However, in terms of Regulation 14(2) of the
said Regulations, review/re-examination
cannot be asked for by an examinee successful
in the examination. However, they are entitled
only to apply for scrutiny. Even if there be
apparent error in assessment that cannot be
rectified on scrutiny in terms of the said
Regulations, an examinee would not have any
remedy and is likely to suffer for the rest of his
life. In terms of regulations of the University,
whether one be a successful or unsuccessful
candidate, he cannot apply for review/re-
examination of all individual papers but it is
generally confined to two of the papers of the
examinee's choice. Scrutiny is barred whether
review/re-examination is permissible.
Ordinarily, an examinee seeks review of
answer scripts pertaining to those papers
where marks awarded are low and not to his
satisfaction. The purpose of allowing review at
times is frustrated because the examinee is
unaware as to which of the papers he should
apply for reviews. If access to each and every
answer scripts is given to an examinee, that
would only effectuate the right to apply for
review and render it purposeful. Take the
instance of an examinee who according to his
estimation of the merits of the answers written
by him expects at least 80% marks in all papers
but on being furnished the mark sheet finds
that he has secured marks as per his
expectation in all but two papers in which he
has been awarded 50% marks. Without having
access to the answer scripts, the normal
reaction would be to apply for review of those
scripts in which he has been awarded 50%
marks. On revaluation there may or may not be
any change. However, in the process, the
scripts on which he has been awarded 80% or
more marks go unnoticed and even if there be
any error in marking a question answered or
error in totalling, the examinee would have to
bear its consequence for the rest of his life. If all
the answer scripts are made open to inspection