Court No. - 39 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 42368 of 2009 Petitioner :- Ramaanuj Dixit Respondent :- U.P. Board Of High School & Intermediate And Others Petitioner Counsel :- Pramod Kr. Srivastava,Yogesh Kumar Saxena Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Dilip Gupta,J.
The petitioner who had appeared at the High School Examination-
2009 has filed this petition as he was not satisfied with the marks
awarded to him in English Paper-I.
In English Paper-I, the petitioner was awarded 17 marks out of 50
while in English Paper-II, he was awarded 20 marks out of 50. On
5th October, 2009, the Court passed the following order:-
“Copies have been produced by the learned Standing Counsel with
regard to the petitioner’s examination of English I and English II
papers of High School Examination, 2009. According to the
petitioner who is present in person after seeing the answer sheet
he has denied that the answers contained in the I paper of English
are not in his hand writing.
In the circumstances, it is directed that the Regional Secretary,
Allahabad Region, Allahabad shall get an inquiry conducted and
submit his report within four weeks. The petitioner will also be
allowed to particpate in the inquiry.
List this petition on 9th November, 2009.
It may be clarified that with regard to English II paper this Court
does not find any discrepancy and this petition confines to English
paper I only.”
Learned Standing Counsel states that in the enquiry, it is found
that the answer book of English Paper-I has been tampered. He
further states that a decision has been taken to award the petitioner
the same number of marks as have been awarded to him in English
Paper-II.
Learned counsel for the petitioner, however, submitted that the
petitioner should be awarded the average marks of entire subjects.
This is not possible since the answer book of English Paper-II is
available and no report of tampering has been made in English
Paper-II. Inasmuch as tampering has been established in English
Paper-I, the petitioner is entitled to a cost of Rs.5000/- to be paid
to him by the Board. It shall, however, be open to the Board to
recover the said cost from the person responsible for said
tampering.
The writ petition is allowed to the extent indicated above.
Order Date :- 2.2.2010
GS