Can't Permit Revaluation Of Answer Sheets In Absence Of Express Provision Or Exceptional Circumstance: MP High Court
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has dismissed a writ petition seeking revaluation of a student's answer sheet, reaffirming the established legal principle that revaluation cannot be mandated in the absence of a specific provision.
Justice G.S. Ahluwalia, while delivering the judgment on July 25, categorically stated that there is no provision for revaluation of answer sheets in the relevant rules and regulations.
The court emphasized that this is a well-settled legal position, and even the appointment of court-appointed experts for revaluation is not permissible.
The petitioner, Adarsh Pandey, had challenged the evaluation of his answer sheet, contending that it was not properly checked. He sought a writ of mandamus directing the Board of Secondary Education to revalue his answer sheet or, alternatively, to appoint a new valuer.
The court relied on the landmark judgment of the Supreme Court in Ran Vijay Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh, (2018) which outlined the clear legal framework for revaluation and scrutiny of answer sheets. The apex court had held that revaluation can be permitted only in exceptional cases where a material error is demonstrated beyond doubt.
In another significant case, High Court of Tripura v. Tirtha Sarathi Mukherjee (2019) the Supreme Court acknowledged that while there is no absolute bar on courts directing revaluation in extraordinary circumstances, such cases must be extremely rare and exceptional. The burden of proof lies heavily on the petitioner to establish such exceptional circumstances. Similar was stated in Sharinath Das Gupta vs. Board of Secondary Education, 2018 (3) M.P.L.J. 76 The Madhya Pradesh High Court highlighted that the petitioner must demonstrate exceptional circumstances to warrant revaluation.
In the present case, the petitioner failed to convince the court that any exceptional circumstances warranted revaluation. Despite being given an opportunity to point out specific errors in the evaluation, the petitioner could not demonstrate any clear or indisputable mistakes. The court found that the petitioner's claims were not supported by sufficient evidence and that the evaluation process was conducted in accordance with established procedures.
“Undisputedly, there is no provision for revaluation. It is well established principle of law that in absence of any provision for revaluation, the Court cannot direct for revaluation even by appointing the Court appointed experts.”
The court, therefore, dismissed the petition, upholding the decision of the Board of Secondary Education.
Case title: Adarsh Pandey Versus The Board Of Secondary Education
Citation: W.P. No.18656/2024