The Chairman's discretion in relation to a particular matter is exhausted once he has exercised it and he cannot again claim to revise his decision already taken by exercising his discretion a second time.

( 1 ) IN this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the applicant purshottam-das seeks a writ of mandamus directing the opponents to permit him to appear for the examination conducted by the Board of Secondary Education for the Higher Secondary School Certificate (hereinafter referred to as Pre-University examination) this year.

( 2 ) THIS petition was filed a few days before the commencement of the examination. We were anxious that the petition should be heard and disposed of before the examination began. But as the respondents were not prepared to address arguments within the short time at their disposal, they rightly agreed to allow the applicant to appear for the examination on the condition that the result of his performance in the examination would not be disclosed in the event of this petition failing. The examination has now been held, and the question for determination is whether the opponents' refusal to permit the applicant to appear for the examination was justified.

( 3 ) THE petitioner's case is that he passed the Matriculation Examination conducted by the Board in 1958. In 1959 he appeared for the Pre-University Examination of the Board but failed in it. Thereafter he was trying to secure admission in any of the colleges teaching Science but was unable to secure admission till the end of september, 1959. In October, 1959 he secured admission in the Navin Vidya bhavan and pursued in that institution the Pre-University course. He sent his application for examination in due course and was allowed to take practical examinations in Physics and Chemistry held by the Board on 18th and 19th March. 1960. On 10th March, 1960 he was orally informed by the Principal of the Navin vidya Bhavan that the Board had decided not to permit him to appear for the theory examinations as he had not attended, the minimum number of lectures delivered in his subjects for qualifying himself for the examination and that under the rules in force the deficiency in his attendance could not be condoned.

( 4 ) THE applicant contends that having already attended seventy-five per cent of the lectures delivered before he appeared for the Pre-University examination in 1959 it was not necessary for him to fulfil again the requirement about seventy-five per cent attendance; that the Board was wrong in calculating the attendance on the basis of the number of lectures delivered only in one academical year 195960 at the Navin Vidya Bhavan; that under Regulation 5 of Chapter XXIII of the regulations framed by the Board in 1959 the attendance had to be calculated on the basis of the lectures delivered during two academical years in classes X and XI that under the regulations the Board had the power to condone any deficiency in the attendance; and that even if the attendance fell short of the minimum required, the Board having allotted him a roll number for the examination and allowed him to appear for the practical examinations in Physics and Chemistry had already exercised its discretion in the matter of condoning the deficiency in attendance and was therefore precluded from reversing the decision already taken in exercise of its discretion.

( 5 ) THE reply of the opponent is that the petitioner's late admission in Navin Vidya bhavan did not ipso facto make him as of right eligible to the admission or entitle him to a condonation of the deficiency in his attendance; that under regulations 5 and 8 of the Regulations contained in Chapter XXIII the attendance had to be calculated for one academic session during which the school was open; that the power to condone deficiency in the prescribed percentage of the attendance was vested in the Chairman of the Board and he could condone the deficiency If it was within the permissible limits in exceptional cases on the recommendation of the head of the Institution under regulation 13 of Chapter; that the applicant's deficiency in attendance exceeded the deficiency which the Chairman wa