Rekha Vinod vs the Controller of Examination

Rekha Vinod vs The Controller of Examination

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Nov 01, 2023

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1409656

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1409656
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr. Justice T.R.Ravi
Decided On: Nov 01, 2023
Case Number: WP(C)/41634/2022

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Rekha Vinod

Respondent

The Controller of Examination

Excerpt

.....produced the copy of the answer sheet along with the writ petition.3. the respondents have produced the copyof the answer sheet after revaluation. a comparison of the two shows that as far as question no.12 is concerned initially the valuer had given marks even for reproducing the question in the answer sheet. while after revaluation, the mark was restricted to the answer alone since a candidate is not entitled to get any mark for reproducing the question. moreover, it is seen that on revaluation, another question to which the petitioner had answered, has been awarded more marks on revaluation. the petitioner cannot hence, have a grievance regarding the revaluation. the facts of the case do not warrant any interference by this court. the writ petition is hence dismissed. sd/- t.r.ravi judge skp/01-11 appendix of wp(c) 41634/2022 petitioner’s exhibits: exhibit p1 a true copy of the marks statement cum certificate bearing no.1446202 dated 22.07.2022, issued by the first respondent. exhibit p2 a true copy of the communication bearing no.cbse/ ce/pps/ 2022 dated 23.07.2022, issued by the first respondent. exhibit p3 a true copy of the answer sheet of the mathematics paper, received from the 1st respondent. exhibit p4 a true copy of the email representation dated 12th september, 2022. exhibit p5 a true copy of the reply received from the second respondent dated 13th september, 2022. respondents’ annexures: annexure r1(a) the copy of the petitioner's son's answer book of the subject mathematics after revaluation true copy p.a. to judge

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAVI WEDNESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF NOVEMBER 2023 / 10TH KARTHIKA, 1945 WP(C) NO. 41634 OF 2022 PETITIONER: 1 REKHA VINOD AGED 43 YEARS W/O SHRI VINOD, "MADHAVAM", AYUR.P.O. KOLLAM-691 533. BY ADVS. T.C.GOVINDASWAMY KALA T.GOPI SUDHIR KUMAR B. NISHITHA BALACHANDRAN RESPONDENTS: 1 THE CONTROLLER OF EXAMINATION CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION, "SHIKSHA KENDRA" 2, COMMUNITY CENTRE, PREET VIHAR, DELHI - 110 092. 2 THE DIRECTOR, REGIONAL OFFICE, CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION, CTTC, ADMIN BLOCK, BSNL RTTC, CAMPUS, KAIMANAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 040. BY ADV SRI.NIRMAL S., STANDING COUNSEL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.11.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
T.R. RAVI, J.
W.P.(C.) No.41634 of 2022 Dated this the 01st day of November, 2023

JUDGMENT

The writ petition has been filed seeking to quash Ext.P5 and to declare that the petitioner is entitled to secure 70 marks in the subject Mathematics in the examination conducted in March, 2022.

2. The grievance of the petitioner is that

even though initially it was shown that question No.12 carried 2½ marks, later on revaluation, it has been reduced. According to the petitioner, there was no request for such a revaluation and all that was required is to recount. The petitioner has produced the copy of the answer sheet along with the writ petition.

3. The respondents have produced the copy

of the answer sheet after revaluation. A comparison of the two shows that as far as question No.12 is concerned initially the valuer had given marks even for reproducing the question in the answer sheet. While after revaluation, the mark was restricted to the answer alone since a candidate is not entitled to get any mark for reproducing the question. Moreover, it is seen that on revaluation, another question to which the petitioner had answered, has been awarded more marks on revaluation. The petitioner cannot hence, have a grievance regarding the revaluation. The facts of the case do not warrant any interference by this Court. The writ petition is hence dismissed. Sd/- T.R.RAVI JUDGE SKP/01-11 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 41634/2022 PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE MARKS STATEMENT CUM CERTIFICATE BEARING NO.1446202 DATED 22.07.2022, ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION BEARING NO.CBSE/ CE/PPS/ 2022 DATED 23.07.2022, ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE ANSWER SHEET OF THE MATHEMATICS PAPER, RECEIVED FROM THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE EMAIL REPRESENTATION DATED 12TH SEPTEMBER, 2022. EXHIBIT P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY RECEIVED FROM THE SECOND RESPONDENT DATED 13TH SEPTEMBER, 2022. RESPONDENTS’ ANNEXURES: ANNEXURE R1(A) THE COPY OF THE PETITIONER'S SON'S ANSWER BOOK OF THE SUBJECT MATHEMATICS AFTER REVALUATION TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2023 Same Parties Rekha Vinod vs The Controller of Examination Same Judge Honourable Mr. Justice T.R.Ravi

Central Board Concerned in high court True copy Has been Re mark