IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.516 of 2026 ======================================================

1. Arya Kumari, minor through her natural guardian and father Bhupesh Kumar Tripathi, aged about 47 years, male, son of Late Kavindra Nath Tripathai, R/o Village-Kazipur, P.O.-Dumri, P.S.-Simri, District-Buxar.

2. Prince Kumar, Minor, through his natural guardian and father Ajay Kumar Gupta, aged about 51 years, male, Son of Ramesh Prasad, resident of Afim Kothi, Majhuva, Arrah, P.S.-Awadhpuri, District-Bhojpur, Pin-802301.

3. Sanjog Kumar Roy, minor, through his natural guardian and mother Lilavati Devi, aged about 49 years, female, wife of Hiralal Ray, R/o Village-Girija More, P.O.-Nawada Arrah, District-Bhojpur.

4. Neha Kumari, minor, through his natural guardian and father Sunil Prasad Kharwar, aged about 42 years, male, son of Mahendra Prasad Kharwar, Resident of Bhaluhipur, Chajangunj, Arrah, District-Bhojpur.

5. Sristi Kumari, minor, through her natural guardian and mother Sima Devi, aged about 39 years, female, Wife of Rajiv Kumar, resident of Maula Bagh, Gayatri Mandir, Arrah, District-Bhojpur.

... ... Petitioner/s Versus

1. Bihar School Examination Board Sinha Library Road, Patna through Secretary.

2. The Chairman, Bihar School Examination Board, Sinha Library Road, Patna.

3. The Secretary, Bihar School Examination Board, Sinha Library Road, Patna. 4. The Examination Controller, Bihar School Examination Board, Sinha Library Road, Patna. ... ... Respondent/s ======================================================

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sunil Kumar Singh, Adv. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Satyabir Bharti, Sr. Adv.

Mr. Abhishek Anand, Adv.

Ms. Kanupriya, Adv.

Ms. Aastha Prakash, Adv.

======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER

2 12-02-2026 Heard Mr. Sunil Kumar Singh, learned Advocate for the petitioners and Mr. Satyabir Bharti, learned senior Advocate representing the Bihar School Examination Board (for short ‘the BSEB’).

2. The petitioners, through their natural guardians, have approached this Court aggrieved with their respective marks awarded to them in the Matriculation Examination–2025 conducted by the Bihar School Examination Board (BSEB). Despite having performed outstandingly well in the said examination, they have been awarded less marks in comparison to their performance. On being dissatisfied with the evaluation, they approached this Court seeking revaluation of their answer scripts by constituting an independent committee of academicians/teachers.

3. Mr. Satyabir Bharti, learned Senior Advocate for the BSEB, at the outset, refuted the contention and submits at the Bar, that in absence of any provision for revaluation of answer-books in the relevant rules, no candidate in an examination has got any right whatsoever to claim or ask for revaluation of his marks. The issue has been duly considered and set at rest by series of decisions, out of which two of them have been referred before this Court i.e. Pramod Kumar Srivastava v. Chairman Bihar Public Service Commission, Patna & Ors. [(2004) 6 SCC 714] and further Dr. NTR University of Health Sciences v. Dr. Yerra Trinadh & Ors.

[(2022) 18 SCC 716].

4. Heard the learned Advocate for the respective parties and carefully gone through the rulings of the Apex Court, where the Court has made it clear that in absence of specific provision conferring a right upon an examinee to have his answer books re-evaluated no such direction can be issued. It would be worth benefitting to encapsulate para-7 of the decision rendered in the case of Pramod Kumar Srivastava (supra).

“7. We have heard the appellant (writ petitioner) in person and learned counsel for the respondents at considerable length. The main question which arises for consideration is whether the learned Single Judge was justified in directing re-evaluation of the answer-book of the appellant in General Science paper. Un