The Court's power to interfere in the evaluation process is limited to cases of apparent infirmity, and it should be exercised cautiously to avoid undermining the credibility of the examination system.

JUDGMENT :

A. Pasayat, J. - An examinee goes to an examination hall with lots of expectations, aspirations, hopes and apprehensions. Assessment of knowledge of an examine being the primary object of an examination, apprehensions exist whether preparation is adequate. Examination is essentially the process of testing the knowledge or ability of pupils. Expectations, aspirations and hopes are linked with the result, which would chart out future of the examinee. That is how. an examination has a vital role in the life of a student. Unemployment problems in the country are going up alarmingly. Every student is under constant doubt whether after completion of studentship, he would be left guessing in the cross-roads of uncertainty, which course to adopt, seek a job or pursue higher studies. With demand for seats higher than available seats, stiff competition is faced to get a seat. In the above background, any deficiency in evaluation of answer scripts of an examinee has serious consequences. Recently published results of Annual Higher Secondary (Science) Examination, 1996 conducted by the Council of Higher Secondary Education, Orissa (in short, 'Council') have opened a Pandora's box of confusion, anguish and consternation, and result is about 1,2 0 candidates have knocked the doors of this Court for redressal.

2. All these writ applications contain a common grievance regarding improper evaluation in respect of answer papers of candidates who appeared at the concerned examination. Petitioners in each case was a candidate, and has made a grievance that the evaluation of answer papers is casual, improper with non-chalant, unconcern with consequences which flow from such evaluation. According to them, the Examiners appointed by the Council have awarded marks which are much below the actual marks which the candidate deserved on the basis of answers given. The number of writ applications filed shows massiveness of the problem. The Council has taken a stale plea that revaluation is not permissible, and the Court exercising power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, 1950 (in short, 'the Constitution) should not go into the forbidden area of evaluation of answer scripts. it has been submitted that though there are some instances which have corns to surface in respect of evaluation of answer scripts, yet considering number of candidates who have appeared, the variations noticed are not so alarming as to warrant interference "by this Court. Strong reliance is placed by the learned. counsel for Council on a decision of the apex Court in Council of Higher Secondary Education, Orissa and Ors. v. Yasodhara Padhi (Civil Appeal No. 1362 of 1990 disposed of on 28-2-1990). The facts involved in that case are entirely different, and the apex Court was not confronted with problems of the magnitude posed in the cases at hand. In fact the apex Court has observed that in the cases of apparent infirmity the Court can step in.

3. It is not in dispute that the Regulations of the Council do not permit review, and as such no review of the answer scripts can be done. It cannot be denied that an examinee has a right to fair-play and get appropriate marks according to his performance. What constitutes fair-play depends upon the facts and circumstances relating to an examination in a given situation. If it is found that every possible precaution has been taken and all necessary safeguards provided to ensure that the answer scripts inclusive of supplements are kept in safe custody so as to eliminate the danger of their being tampered with and that the evaluation is done by the examiners applying uniform standards with checks and cross-checks at different stages, and that measure for detection of malpractice has also been effectively adopted. In such cases it would not be proper for the Court to interfere.

4. According to the Council all necessary steps in respect of aforesaid aspects have been taken. As observed by the apex Court in Maharashtra State Board