On 7th October 2022, The Bombay High Court Aurangabad Bench in a decision bench comprising of Justice Ravindra V. Ghuge and Justice Arun R. Pedneker, observed that the Issuance of Marksheet not allowed for an Impermissible attempt in an Improvement Exam. (Omkar V. The State of Maharashtra, through the Secretary, School Education Department & others)
Facts of the Case:
The petitioner submitted his examination form from respondent No.3, Mahatma Basweshwar Junior College, Ramtakli, for appearing in February-March 2020 examination of Standard 12th Science. However, he got less than 50% marks and was unable to apply for NEET examination. He, thus, applied for first improvement examination in the month of October-November 2020 and again he was not able to score the required 50%. The petitioner, thereafter, again applied for the second improvement examination in March 2021 which was delayed and held in in the month of September-October 2021. But again, he was not able to score 50% to compete for the NEET examination. The petitioner thereafter submitted his application form for the third improvement examination to be held in the month of February-March 2022, through the respondent No.3 and was declared passed for March 2022 examination obtaining 73.67% marks. Accordingly, marks sheet was uploaded on the website. The petitioner, however, was not given his original mark sheet. In view of the same, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition seeking directions to respondent Nos .2 and 3 to issue the original mark sheet.
Contentions of the Petitioner:
The counsel for petitioner submitted that “once the petitioner is permitted to appear for the examination and his result being declared, it is not permissible for the respondent authorities to withhold his original mark sheet.” Reliance was made on the case of Shri Krishan Vs. The Kurukshetra University, Kurukshetra; Syed Abdul Qadir and Ors. Vs. State of Bihar and Ors. and Samruddhi Sambhaji Padwal and others Vs. The State of Maharashtra and others.
Contentions of the Respondents:
The counsel for respondent 2 submitted that, “the petitioner is entitled for two improvement examinations and the petitioner having exhausted both these options earlier, he is not permitted or allowed to take his third improvement examination.” He further submitted that, there is an apparent error on the part of respondent No.3 College to issue hall ticket to the petitioner for the third attempt, the petitioner was aware of the same and the respondent No.3 has not either verified or has acted in collusion with the petitioner in granting him the third opportunity, and as such, the Board is entitled to reject the third improvement examination result. The counsel for respondent no. 2 relied upon the communications marked X-1, X-2, -3, X-4 and X-5 submitted that, “petitioner has utilized these opportunities in terms of the said Circular and has exhausted all the available options of improvement examination.”
Observations and Judgement of the Court:
The Hon’ble court while referring to the case of Samruddhi Sambaji Padwal observed that the “respondent No. 2 - Board had permitted third attempt for improvement examination to the petitioner therein, although it was not available and the petitioner in the present case seeks parity of the same for giving third improvement examination. In view of the concession made in Padwal’s case and the specific observations of the Division Bench, not to treat the order as a precedent, we hold that the said order cannot be called in aid of the present petitioner. The Hon’ble Supreme court in the case of Kurukshetra University held that petitioner’s candidature cannot be withdrawn once the examination is over. In the instant case, the petitioner has not pointed out any such mandatory provision, whereby the candidature cannot be withdrawn after appearing for examinations and thus no directions can be given in this regard. Rather, as per the prescribed norms, there can be no third attempt for improvement in examination.” The Court also noticed the GR dated 2nd July 2021 issued by the School Education and Sports Department, State of Maharashtra, regarding declaration of evaluation procedure for the Higher Secondary Certificate Examination (Standard 12th) for the academic year 2020-21 which said that only two opportunities for improvement examination can be given.
The writ petition was dismissed and the petitioner’s 3rd attempt was held illegal and hence, not legitimised.
Case: Omkar V. The State of Maharashtra, through the Secretary, School Education Department & others
Bench: Justice Ravindra V. Ghuge and Justice Arun R. Pedneker
Citation: Writ Petition no.9192 of 2022
Date: 7th October 2022
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com
Picture Source :
