SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1997 Supreme(MP) 611

A.K. Mathur, D. Misra
M.P. Board Of Secondary Education
vs
Ku. Vinita Rupra
Decided On : 12 September, 1997

Scrutiny of marks means close examination of the marks obtained by a candidate, not revaluation of the entire answer book.

Headnote:

MADHYA PRADESH BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION - SCRUTINY OF MARKS - REGULATION 119 - REVALUATION OF ANSWER BOOKS - INTERPRETATION - KEY LEGAL PRINCIPLE: Scrutiny of marks means close examination of the marks obtained by a candidate, not revaluation of the entire answer book.

Fact of the Case:

Students who appeared in the Higher Secondary Certificate Examination or High School Certificate Examination conducted by the Madhya Pradesh Board of Secondary Education (MPBSE) applied for scrutiny of their marks. The Board rejected their applications, claiming that 'scrutiny of marks' only meant 're-totalling of marks' and not revaluation of answer books.

Finding of the Court:

The Court held that the expression 'scrutiny of marks' appearing in Regulation 119 of the MPBSE Regulations and the rules framed by the Board meant close examination of the marks obtained by a candidate, not revaluation of the entire answer book. The Court interpreted the word 'scrutiny' in its ordinary sense, considering the context and purpose of the Regulation and the rules.

Issues: Whether the expression 'scrutiny of marks' in Regulation 119 of the MPBSE Regulations and the rules framed by the Board included revaluation of answer books.

Ratio Decidendi: The Court relied on the dictionary meaning of 'scrutiny' and the context and purpose of Regulation 119 and the rules framed by the Board to conclude that 'scrutiny of marks' meant close examination of the marks obtained by a candidate, not revaluation of the entire answer book. The Court also considered the practical implications of allowing revaluation of answer books, noting that it would be an impossible task given the large number of students appearing in the examinations.

Final Decision: The Court allowed the appeals filed by the MPBSE and set aside the order of the Single Judge directing the Board to revaluate the answer books of the students.

JUDGMENT

A.K. Mathur, C.J.

1. This is a Letters Patent Appeal directed against order dated 1-10-1996 passed by learned Single Judge in a batch of writ petitions, whereby the learned Single Judge has issued following directions to the State of M. P. and to the Secretary, M. P. Board of Secondary Education, Habibganj, Bhopal.

"18. In the result all the writ petitions are allowed with the following directions :

(i) The respondent Board shall communicate to students through the electronic and printing media that they can apply for scrutiny of marks, which shall include revaluation of the answer books within two weeks from today;

(ii) All the examinees shall be given two weeks time to file their applications for scrutiny of marks along with the requisite fee;

(iii) The Board shall on receipt of the applications by the examinees revaluate the same;

(iv) The result of the revaluation shall be communicated by the Board to the examinees expeditiously;

(v) The Board shall furnish to the State Government the list of teachers, who in its opinion did not perform their duties as examiner diligently; and

(vi) The State Government shall take appropriate action against the delinquent teacher within two months from the date of communication by the Board, in accordance with law."

2. All the petitioners are students and they appeared in the Higher Secondary Certificate Examination or High School Certificate Examination conducted by the Madhya Pradesh Board of Secondary Education (hereinafter referred to as the 'Board') and sought scrutiny of their marks. It was submitted before the learned Single Judge on behalf of the Board that 'scrutiny of marks' only means 're-totalling of marks' and it does not permit interpretation of revaluation of answer books. In this context, learned Single Judge examined the case.

3. Appellant Board is a statutory body constituted under section 3 of the M. P. Madhyamik Shiksha Act, 1965 (for short the Act'). Powers have been conferred on the Board to take all necessary steps to conduct examination in a reliable, comprehensive and elaborate manner. Section 28 of the Act confers powers on the Board to make Regulations for carrying into the effect the provisions of the Act. In exercise of this power, the Board framed Regulations known as M. P. Board Secondary Education Regulation, 1965 (for short - the Regulation). Regulation 119 which is relevant for our purpose reads as under :

"119. A candidate who has appeared at an examination of the Board may apply to the secretary for the scrutiny of his marks and the rechecking of his result in accordance with the rules framed by the Board."

In pursuance of this Regulation 119, certain rules have also been framed by the Board which in its meeting held on 7-12-1981, took the following decisions :

(A) The examinees appearing in the examination conducted by the Board can make a request within two months from the date of declaration of the result, after paying prescribed fee for retotalling of the answer books examined.

(B) Passed students if make request then answer books of all subjects and in case of failed student or students entitled for supplementary, make application then the answer books of failed subject shall only be retotalled.

(C) The totalling shall be done by the members of the local Board, members of the Curriculum committee, teachers of State Educational Institutions, Educational Colleges, Institution of English Language and two senior lecturers of the Higher Secondary School. Both the members after seeing the answer book shall give their report separately.

(D) In case, in the answer book any question remained unmarked then it shall be evaluated by the teachers/lecturers of the concerned subject.

4. The petitioners (respondents) applied for re-totalling of their marks on payment of certain fee. Application is required to be made within a period of two months. It is not disputed that the candidates appeared in the examination and applied for retotalling of their marks as required under R


















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top