Aditya Narayan Rai (Minor) v. Union of India and 3 Others

Court No. - 10 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 41996 of 2023 Petitioner :- Aditya Narayan Rai (Minor) Respondent :- Union Of India And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Srivastava,Surya Pratap Singh Counsel for Respondent :- A.S.G.I.,Dhananjay Awasthi,Rajesh Tripathi Hon'ble Kshitij Shailendra,J.

¶1Heard Sri Shantanu Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Dhananjay Awasthi, learned counsel for the respondent nos.2 and 3.

¶2This writ petition has been filed seeking writ of mandamus commanding the respondent no.3 to re-check/re-evaluate the original answer book of science subject with the Question Paper Code:31/1/3 of secondary examination (Class X) 2023 conducted by the Central Board of Secondary Education by an independent examiner/expert of the subject on the basis of the expected answer handbook in a transparent manner and award marks accordingly.

¶3It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner got lesser marks in comparison to his performance in science paper and therefore, he applied for re-evaluation of his answer copy.

¶4Learned counsel for the petitioner admits that after re-evaluation, marks of the petitioner have been increased by 12. While referring to the answer copy annexed as annexure no.6 to the writ petition, learned counsel has argued that a different set of question paper was given to him and the marking has been done on the basis of a different set of question paper. He has also argued that certain manipulations have been done by the respondents in the answer copy.

¶5Sri Dhananjay Awasthi, learned counsel for the respondents submits that re-evaluated answer copy cannot be supplied to the petitioner. He further submits that once experts have already carried out the exercise of re-evaulation and marks of the petitioner have been increased, this writ petition should not be entertained as it would be an endless process of re-evaluation, which is not permissible under law.

¶6Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and following the ratio laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Dr. B.R. Ambedkar University, Agra Vs. Devarsh Nath Gupta, reported in 2023 Live Law (SC) 131, in which the Hon'ble Apex Court has elaborately discussed the scope of exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by making reference to various previous authorities, there being disputed questions of fact involved in the present case, which the Writ Court is not competent to examine, no direction for re-evaulating the answer-sheet can be issued.

¶7The writ petition has no merit and it is accordingly dismissed. Order Date :- 6.12.2023 pks High Court of Judicature at Allahabad