O R D E R

Mr.Abhishek Murthy, learned Government Advocate accepts notice for the respondents and is armed with instructions to enable final disposal of the matter at this juncture.

2. The petitioner seeks a mandamus directing R2/the Director, School Education Department, Chennai to retain the highest marks obtained by his daughter in the Higher Secondary School Examination, after revaluation, which was held during 2016. He would claim to have send a representation in this regard on 16.07.2016. However, the acknowledgement card placed does not reveal clearly when the same has been served on R2.

3. Be that as it may, on the merit of the request made by the petitioner, learned Government Advocate would rely on G.O.Ms.No.77 dated 07.05.2001 dealing with subject of revaluation wherein at paragraph-10, he submits that marks obtained in revaluation are final and are not subject to any amendment whatsoever.

4.He also circulates a copy of the application to be filed by a candidate seeking re-total/revaluation, which contains the norms for revaluation as below:

'1.In Re-valuation, all the answers will be re-valued by a team of 3 senior subject teachers.

2.On Re-valuation, if increase or decreases in marks occur, the same will be efflected in both ways.

3.If there is any decrease or increase in total marks these marks would be taken as final and a new mark certificate will be issued to the candidate by cancelling the earlier one accordingly.'

5.The position that results, is that the candidate seeking revaluation would be bound by the marks obtained in the revaluation either to his advantage or detriment, as the case may be. The aforesaid Government Order had also came to be challenged in W.A.No.2052 of 2001 in V.J.Sharmi, Rep. by her Father and Natural Guardian Mr.V.Jagannath, No.50, Thennamaram Street, Vellore District vs. The Secretary, Selection Committee, Kilpauk, Chennai-10 and another 2002 (1) CTC 478 and has come to be upheld.

6.The Division Bench, at para-4 states as follows:

'4.Most of the States in the country are not having the facility of revaluation of answer scripts and only re-totalling is provided. But in the State of Tamil Nadu, a Scheme of revaluation has been introduced by G.O.Ms.No.77, School Education Department dated 7.5.2001. As per the above Governmental Order, students who appeared for Higher secondary Examination and hitherto were permitted to apply for re- totalling of marks, have not been permitted to apply and get Xerox copies of their answer scripts besides allowing them to apply for revaluation of Optional Subjects like Mathematics, Physics, Chemistry and Biology. This is made effective for the students, who had appeared for Higher Secondary examination during March, 2001. Several conditions have been enumerated enabling the students to have their answer scripts revaluated. The Scheme has to be read and understood as a whole and while doing so, we derive the meaning that while every student is entitled to have the answer scripts of the examination in any of the subjects mentioned above revaluated, there is no enabling provision for any student to choose only particular naswers to be revaluated. The revaluation is not in bits but it is for all the answers in the examination in that discipline, as a whole. There is no scope to dissect the Scheme and allow a student to choose only some answers to be revaluated. It is different thing if some of the answers have not been valued at all and no marks assigned as against them. In that case, a student may ask those questions to be valued and such answers do not come within the purview of 'revaluation'. But in the instant case, that question does not arise as all the answers have been valued and in the first valuation, for two answers for the question Nos.11 and 12, zero marks were awarded but on revaluation, full marks of one each as against those questions, have been awarded. The contention of Mr.G.Masilamani, learned senior counsel, that only those answers ought to be reval