TRIVENI GIRI Vs. BIHAR INTERMEDIATE EDUCATION COUNCIL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER in the present writ application is the father of the examinee who had appeared in the examination conducted by the Bihar Intermediate Education Council in the month of March. 2005 with Roll Code No. 1301, Roll No. 10336, Enlistment No. R -0109 -02. The relief which has been sought for by the petitioner is for commanding the respondents Intermediate Education Council and its officers for scrutiny/re -evaluation of answer sheets of all subjects of the son of the petitioner as provided under Rule 17(a) and 17(b) of Bihar Intermediate Education Council (Establishment and Examination) Rules, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules).

(2.) THE son of the petitioner namely Neeraj Kumar Giri had appeared in the Intermediate Science Examination conducted by the Bihar Intermediate Education Council, Patna in the year 2004 from H.D. Jain College, Ara (Bhojpur) with Roll Code No. 1301, Roll No. 10336, Enlistment No. R -0109 -02. This exaimination was conducted in the month of February, 2004 and after publication of the result the petitioners son was declared pass in Second Division securing 470 total marks in all subjects. Since the examinee was not satisfied with his marks, as provided under Bihar Intermediate Education Council Act, he again appeared in the Intermediate Science Examination conducted in the month of March, 2005 from H.D. Jain College, Ara with Roll Code 1301, Roll No. 40032, Enlistment No. R -0109 -02. He was declared pass in second division with 480 total marks obtained by him in all subjects. The marks which were obtained by the petitioners son in the examination conducted in the year 2004 and the marks obtained by him in the examination conducted in the year 2005 were identical in all subjects except Hindi. In 2004 examination the petitioners son had obtained 100 marks in English, 116 marks in Physics, 106 marks in Chemistry and 97 marks in Mathematics. In 2005. examination also in English, Physics and Chemistry same marks were secured by him except Hindi in which he got 5 more marks. Petitioners son approached the respondents for re -evaluation of the answer sheets as he was not satisfied with the marks obtained by him. The respondents informed him that there is no provision for re -evaluation of the answer sheets and at best he can submit his application with requisite fee for scrutiny of the answer sheets. He was further informed that under the process of scrutiny only the totalling of the marks is verified and nothing more is done. In the writ application it has been admitted by the petitioner that the petitioners son did not present his application for scrutiny.

(3.) COUNTER affidavit has been filed by respondents 1 to 3 (Bihar intermediate Education Council and others). In the counter affidavit it has been stated that the council has already made advertisement in the newspaper vide communique no. 29/ 2005 dated 9.6.2005 indicating therein that the examinees interested to get their answer books scrutinized, should apply within 10.6.2005 to 15.7.2005 with the requisite fee so that their answer books may be scrutinized. Several examinees have applied for scrutiny in response to the advertisement and the council already has taken steps for scrutinizing the answer books of those examinees. The petitioners son did not apply in pursuance of the advertisement for scrutiny of answer books, hence there was no reason to do the scrutiny of the marks obtained by petitioners son.