The Results Committee cannot amend the result of an examination based on mere suspicion. It must find that the result was affected by error or use of malpractice, fraud, improper conduct or other matter of whatsoever, nature.

( 1 ) BY this petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India the two petitioners seek a writ of mandamus or any other suitable writ, direction or order for quashing the order of cancellation of the result of the petitioners of subject of Physics of the Higher Secondary School Certificate Examination, 1996, conducted by the Board of Secondary Education, Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal (for short the 'board' ).

( 2 ) FACTS : The petitioners as regular students of Government Higher Secondary School, Gangev, Rewa appeared in l2th Board Higher Secondary School Certificate Examination, 1996 conducted by the Board from Examination Centre 13047. The petitioners were declared pass in Second Division and mark-sheets-Annexure- A/1 and A/2 were issued to the petitioners respectively. The Valuers and Vuluation Officer vide document No. 1 dt. 30-3-96 complained and reported of mass copying and use of unfair means by the examinees at Examination Centre 13047 and at other Centres. The Board received the report of Valuers on 16-4-1996. On Valuers report, the Results Committee constituted under Regalation 40 of Board of Secondary Education, Madhya Pradesh Regulations, 1965 framed under S. 28 of the Madhya Pradesh Madhyamik Shiksha Adhiniyam 1965 (23 of 1965) (for short the 'adhiniyam' ) in exercise of its powers conferred on it under Regulation 117, decided to award zero mark to the examinees in the subject of Physics vide Document No. IA and sent its report- Document No. 2 to Examination Committee. After consideration of the representation of the principal of the institution a decision was taken to award zero mark and to declare the result of 39 students who appeared from Centre 13047 and thus a notification dt. 24-7-1996- Document No. 4 permitting students to appear in forthcoming Supplementary Examination was issued.

( 3 ) SHRI Ajit Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners answered the examination papers of all the subjects with their utmost sincerity without use of any unfair means. The Results Committee in its report Document - IA was not of definite opinion, hence, decided to declare the result. Results Committee further decided to award zero mark to students appeared with Roll No. 2134250 to 2134272 in subject of -oology and to declare the result. However, the petitioners were awarded zero mark, not in -oology but in subject of Physics on thc basis of suspicion of mass copying by the Valuers, which is illegal.

( 4 ) SMT. June Choudhary, learned counsel for the respondent-Board submitted that after the decision of the Results Committee, zero mark was awarded to 39 students who appeared in the subject of Physics. However, when the matter came before this Court and the petitioners pointed out that the report of the Results Committee is based on suspicion all the copies were got re-examined, wherein, out of 39,20 cases were found of mass copying, while 19 cases inclusive of petitioners were not found of mass copying or use of unfair means. In the circumstances the respondent-Board, now shall declare the result of the petitioners afresh.

( 5 ) LEARNED counsel for the petitioners submits that because of the negligence of the Results Committee, the Board has played with the career of the petitioners, one year of the petitioners has gone waste as the petitioners could not seek admission in B. Sc. Part-I nor the petitioners could appear in any competitive examination. Petitioners suffered a great mental agony only because ot the lapse on the part of the Board in not taking a definite decision by the Results Committee based on Valuers report, the petitioners be awarded heavy compensation.

( 6 ) RESULTS Committee is constituted under Regulation 40 whose duties are enumerated in Regulation 41. This Committee is empowered under Regulation 117 to amend the result under certain circumstances enumerated in Regulation 117. It would be appropriate to extract Regulations 41 and 117 :"41. It shall be the duty of