- (1.) The petitioner wrote the Higher Secondary Examination conducted by the West Bengal Council of Higher Secondary Education in 1992. Biological Sciences was his optional elective subject. He secured a total of 137 marks in such subject. It is claimed that in terms of the relevant Regulations of the Council marks secured in excess of 80 in the optional elective subject is to be added to the total of marks secured in the subjects comprising language group and the compulsory elective subjects. The Council, however, issued a mark sheet in favour of the petitioner on the basis of the marks obtained by him in the language group as well as the compulsory elective subjects without giving him credit of 57 marks, which he was entitled to having secured 137 marks in the optional elective subject. Having attained 48.8% marks, he was, accordingly, placed in the second division. It is the petitioner's grievance that if 57 marks had been added to the grand total, he would have passed the Higher Secondary Examination with more than 50% marks (54.5% to be precise).
(2.) The West Bengal Council of Higher Secondary Education (Examination) Regulations 1982, were in existence at the time the petitioner took the Higher Secondary Examination, 1992. Clause (8) of the said Regulations is as follows : The method of assessment shall be numerical, i.e., in terms of marks to be awarded by examiners in each paper or subject as the case may be : Provided that mark-sheet to be issued by the council to a candidate shall bear marks obtained by him/her in each subject including optional elective subject : Provided further that if a candidate offers an Optional Elective subject and passes in it, the marks in excess of 40 per cent marks obtained in the subject shall be added for determining aggregate marks of a successful candidate."
(3.) Since the said Regulations obliged the Council to award to a candidate who offers an optional elective subject and passes the same marks in excess of 40% marks obtained in the subject for being added for determining the aggregate marks, there is no reason as to why while issuing the mark sheet in favour of the petitioner the marks secured by him in excess of 40% was not taken into consideration. There appears to be gross error in the process of issuing mark sheet in his favour which is required to be interdicted to set things right.;