The importance of a consolidated mark-list issued by the competent authority to determine eligibility criteria and the validity of obtaining additional marks in later examinations.

[Per: Hon'ble the Chief Justice (Oral)]

1. The petitioner is a Livestock Extension Officer in the Animal Husbandry Department of the Government of Uttaranchal. He is aggrieved by the denial of admission to him in the B.V.Sc. and A.H. Course conducted by the Govind Ballabh Pant University of Agriculture and Technology Pantnagar in the seats set apart for candidates sponsored by the Government of Uttaranchal.

2. According to the averments in the counter affidavit, the petitioner was denied admission on the ground that he was not eligible for admission for want of the required minimum eligibility qualifications.

3. As per the Prospectus 2005-2006 Issued by the University, out of 62 seats In the B.V.Sc. and A.H. course, 5 seats are reserved for candidates sponsored by the State Government of Uttaranchal. According to Appendix I of the Prospectus, in the case of Livestock Extension Officers nominated by Uttaranchal Government for the B.V.Sc. and A.H. course minimum eligibility qualifications are: (1) 50% marks in Intermediate Science with Biology with at least 50% marks in High School examination and (2) A pass in two years Diploma course in Veterinary Science and A.H. together with five years experience as Livestock Extension Officer or in a higher capacity; OR a pass in 1 ½ Diploma course in Veterinary Science and A.H. together with 7 years experience as Livestock Extension Officer or in a higher capacity. According to the respondents, the petitioner lacks the first qualification i.e. 50% marks in Intermediate Science with Biology with at least 50% marks in High School examination.

4. It is not disputed that when the' petitioner passed High School examination in 1988, he had not obtained 50% marks in High School examination. It is also not disputed that when the petitioner passed Intermediate examination in 1990, he had not studied or taken examination in Science with Biology. However, the contention of the petitioner is that after entering service as Livestock Extension Officer, with the permission of the department he appeared in additional subjects in High School examination in the year 2004 and in those additional subjects he obtained more than 50% marks. It is also stated that in the year 2002, the petitioner appeared in Intermediate examination in three additional subjects Physics, Chemistry and Biology and in that examination, he obtained more than 50% marks. Thus, the contention of the petitioner is that In view of his obtaining more than 50% marks in additional subjects In the High School examination and in the Intermediate examination, he should be treated as eligible for admission.

5. We are not inclined to accept the contention of the petitioner. Even though the petitioner had appeared and passed in additional subjects in High School examination in 2004 and also in additional subjects in Intermediate examination in 2002, he has not produced any consolidated mark-list issued by the competent authority for the purpose of ascertaining the percentage of marks obtained by him in the High School examination and the Intermediate examination. In other words, there is no material to show whether and how the marks obtained by the petitioner in the additional subjects will affect or change the result of the original High School Examination and Intermediate Examination. We do not think it is proper to treat the petitioner eligible only on the basis of the marks obtained by him in the additional subjects. Whether a candidate has obtained 50% marks in Intermediate Science with Biology or 50% marks in High School Examination can be understood only from a mark-list issued by the competent authority in respect of the whole examination. The only complete mark-list in respect of the High School examination is the one which is produced as Annexure 2. Similarly, the only complete mark-list in respect of the Intermediate examination is the one which is also produced as Annexure 2. According to those mark-lists, the petitioner has