( 1 ) THE petitioners in WP 20330 and 20852 of 1997 and the daughter of petitioner in WP 21137 of 1997 appeared for the pre-University examinations conducted by the Department of Pre-University Education ('department' for short) in April, 1997. They have also been issued marks card in regard to their performance in the said examination. The daughter of petitioner in WP No. 21137 of 1997 has passed the said examination. The petitioners in WP Nos 20330 and 20852 of 1997 have failed in some subjects. They applied for revaluation of some papers.

( 2 ) WHEREVER the revaluation marks was found to be within a range of plus or minus five, the department has not effected any change in the original marks; but where the change was more than plus or minus five, that is plus or minus six or more, the department has called upon the candidates to surrender the marks cards for correction/reissue of marks cards by incorporating the marks obtained on revaluation.

( 3 ) IN the case of candidates concerned in these petitions, there was a downward revision by six or more marks on revaluation. Therefore the Department has called upon them to surrender the marks cards, for incorporation of the lesser marks obtained on revaluation. As a result the petitioner's daughter (in WP No. 21137 of 1997) will become ineligible for admission to professional courses under the Karnataka Selection of Candidates for admission to Engineering, Medical and Dental Course Rules, 1997. The petitioners in other two writ petitions will fail in some subjects, where they had earlier passed. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioners have filed these petitions and sought quashing of endorsements dated 14-7-1997 issued by the department (respectively Annexure H, F and A in the three petitions) calling upon the candidates to surrender the marks cards issued to them and receive the revised marks card. They have also sought striking down the last sentence of sub-Rule (4) of Rule 29 of the Karnataka Pre-University Course State Level Examination Rules, 1997 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules) which reads "only when there is an upward or downward revision by six or more marks, in revaluation, a fresh marks card shall be issued. " They have also sought a direction to the department to retain the original marks where the marks on revaluation were found to be lesser than the marks originally obtained.

( 4 ) THE Department has, contended that a student is not entitled to revaluation as a matter of right and the revaluation is permissible only in accordance with the Rules; that it for the State to decide the manner in which revaluation should be permitted; that Rule 29 (4) contemplates substitution of the original marks by revaluation marks where there is an upward or downward revision by six or more marks; and that the petitioners having applied for revaluation, are bound by the results of the revaluation and cannot contend that the marks could be altered only when there is upward revision and not when there is a downward revision. The department, therefore contends that as the marks obtained by the candidates in the revaluation is less than the original marks, and the difference is six or more, the department is entitled to call upon the petitioners to surrender the original marks cards for incorporation of the revaluation marks. Reliance is placed by the department on the decision of the Supreme Court in Maharashtra State Board of Secondary and Higher Secondary Education v. Paritosh Bhupesh Kurmarsheth, AIR 1984 SC 1543 and the decision of the Bombay High Court in Lalit Taori v. Nagpur University, AIR 1986 Bombay 255.

( 5 ) RULE 26 deals with marks lists and valued answer scripts. Rule 27 deals with declaration of results. Rule 28 deals with the retotalling of marks. Rule 29 deals with the revaluation of answer papers. 5. 1. Rule 26 requires that as soon as may be after the close of evaluation of answer scripts each day, marks list shall be prepared by each Examiner and