- (1.) The appellants Council has assailed the judgement and orders dated 29th August, 2007 and 31st August, 2007 whereby the appellant Council was directed to constitute three panels each constituting of three independent experts for examination of answer scripts of the respondent/writ petitioner in respect of questions in Physics, Chemistry and Mathematics papers respectively and submit a detailed report in the matter. The respondent/writ petitioner had challenged the marks awarded to her in Physics, Chemistry and Mathematics papers respectively claiming that improper assessment of her answer scripts were made.
(2.) Mr. Chatterjee, learned counsel appearing for the appellant Council submitted that there was no provision for review re-evaluation of answer scripts under the relevant rules. He further submitted that there was no material placed before the learned Single Judge that the assessment of answer scripts were defect, arbitrary or incomplete and the impugned order directing re-evaluation by an expert committee was illegal. In this connection he relied on Maharashtra State Board of Secondary and Higher Secondary Education v. Paritosh Bhupeshkumar Sheth, 1984 4 SCC 27, Arun D. Desai v. High Court of Bombay, 1984 Supp1 SCC 372, Secy., W.B. Council of Higher Secondary Education v. Ayan Das & Ors., 2007 8 SCC 242 and Central Board of Secondary Education & Anr. v. Aditya Bandopadhyay & Ors., 2011 8 SCC 497.
(3.) Admittedly, the rules of the Council do not provide for re-evaluation/reassessment of answer scripts in connection with relevant examination.;