$~7 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 17510/2025 KRRISH GUPTA (MINOR) .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Pranav Kumar Srivastava, Mr.

Ashish Singh and Mr. Juned, Advocates.

versus COUNCIL FOR THE INDIAN SCHOOL CERTIFICATE EXAMINATIONS (ICSE) & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Mayan Prasad, Mr. Rituraj Biswas and Mr. Aayush Garg, Advocates for R-1 and R-2.

Ms. Sangita Malhotra, Senior Panel Counsel with Mr. Vinod Kumar Gupta, Advocate for R-3/UoI.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI SINGH

O R D E R

% 16.12.2025 CM APPL. 72290/2025 (Exemption)

1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

2. Application stands disposed of.

W.P.(C) 17510/2025

3. This writ petition is filed on behalf of Petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following reliefs:-

“a) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the Respondent No. 1, to get the Petitioner’s Physics answer book from the Improvement Examination dated 09.07.2025, re-evaluated by an independent expert panel;

b) Direct the Respondent No. 1 to provide certified copies of the Petitioner's Physics answer sheets from both the Board and Improvement Examinations;

c) Direct the issuance of a revised mark-sheet based on the re-evaluation, if warranted;

d) Pass such other and further orders that this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice.”

4. Issue notice.

5. Counsels, as above, accept notice on behalf of Respondents No. 1 and 2 and Respondent No. 3.

6. To the extent necessary the facts are that the Petitioner appeared for ISC, Class XII Board Examination conducted by ICSE on 07.03.2025, which included Physics as a subject. On 30.04.2025, ICSE declared the results and Petitioner was awarded 67/100 marks in Physics. On 05.05.2025, Petitioner applied for rechecking of physics paper and paid the prescribed fee. On 20.05.2025, ICSE communicated that there was no change in the marks after rechecking. Petitioner registered himself for Improvement Examination in Physics on 10.06.2025 and appeared in the examination on 09.07.2025. Improvement Examination results were declared on 01.08.2025 and the marks of the Petitioner remained unchanged i.e., 67/100.

7. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that after the result of the Improvement Examination was declared, Petitioner obtained the marksheets and compiled comparative data of 20 other students and found that though they had appeared in different subjects in the Improvement Examination at a gap of four months and were possibly evaluated by different evaluators, their marks remained unchanged, which shows that the improvement examination was a futile exercise and papers were checked without application of mind. It is a settled law that if the Court finds that there is manifest arbitrariness, it can interfere and direct re-evaluation of the answer book by an independent expert panel. Reliance is placed on the judgment of the Supreme Court in Ran Vijay Singh and Others v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Others, (2018) 2 SCC 357, where the Supreme Court held that where a statute, Rule or Regulation governing an examination permits re-evaluation of an answer sheet or scrutiny of an answer sheet as a matter of right, then it must be permitted. However, if a statute, Rule or Regulation governing an examination does not permit re-evaluation or scrutiny of an answer sheet (as distinct from prohibiting it) then the court may permit re-evaluation or scrutiny only if it is demonstrated very clearly, without any “inferential process of reasoning or by a process of rationalisation” and only in rare or exceptional cases that a material error has been committed. It is urged that there is error in the checking of the Physics paper, which is demonstrated by the fact that even in the Improvement Examination the marks remained unchanged and if re- evaluation is not redirected, it will deprive the Petitioner of being considered for admission in several en