Delhi High Court
Mukul Bhardwaj Through Its ... vs Central Board Of Secondary ... on 7 September, 2022
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of order : 7th September, 2022
+ W.P.(C) 12999/2022 & CM APPL. 39407/2022
MUKUL BHARDWAJ THROUGH
ITS NATURAL GUARDIAN ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Govind Narayan and Mr.
Mohit Kr. Sharma, Advocates
versus
CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION
..... Respondent
Through: Mr. M.A. Niyazi, Standing
Counsel with Mr. Arquam Ali,
Advocate
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA DHARI SINGH
ORDER
CHANDRA DHARI SINGH, J (Oral)
1. The instant writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution
of India has been filed on behalf of the petitioner seeking following
reliefs:-
"A) A Writ of appropriate nature under Article 226/227 of
the Constitution of India for issuance of writ of appropriate
nature and thereby to declare that web-page of the online
portal for filing application for obtaining photocopy of
evaluated answer books (Annexure P/4) is misleading in
contents, in the interest of justice;
AND;
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:PRAVEEN
KUMAR BABBAR
Signing Date:12.09.2022
18:02:23
B) Writ of appropriate nature under article 226/227 of the
Constitution of India and thereby to declare that web-page
of online portal for filing application for re-evaluation of
answer books (Annexure P/4) is misleading in contents, in
the interest of justice;
AND;
C) Writ of appropriate nature under article 226/227 of The
Constitution of India and there by direct the respondent to
give photocopy of the evaluated answer books of subjects viz
Mathematics (Subject Code 041) and Physics (Subject Code
042) after receiving the fee of Rs 1400/- (fourteen hundred
only), in the Interest of justice
AND;
D) Writ of appropriate nature under Article 226/227 of The
Constitution of India and there by direct the respondent to
consider the petitioner eligible for the re-evaluation of the
answer books qua the subjects viz Mathematics (Subject
Code 041) and Physics (Subject Code 042), if applied, after
receiving the fee prescribed as per notice dated 23.07.2022,
in the interest of justice
E) Writ of appropriate nature under Article 226/227 of The
Constitution of India for quashing the decision/order of the
respondent, which has been served upon the petitioner vide
email dated 26.08.2022 (part of annexure P/5-Colly), and
thereby direct the respondent to provide the photocopy of the
evaluated answer sheet qua the subject of Mathematics (041)
and Physics (042) and further (if required) to re-evaluate the
answer sheet of the petitioner qua the mentioned subjects, in
the interest of justice..."
2. The Respondent conducted Senior School Certificate Examination
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:PRAVEEN
KUMAR BABBAR
Signing Date:12.09.2022
18:02:23
(Class-XII) for the session 2021-22 and the Petitioner appeared for the
said examination under Roll No. 17630509. The Respondent thereafter
issued a notice bearing No. CBSE/Co-ord/Veri/Class-XII/T2/2022 on 23rd
July 2022, for the verification of marks, obtaining (scanned) photocopy of
the evaluated answer book(s) and re-evaluation of answer(s). As per the
notice dated 23rd July 2022, the Respondent invited application for
verification of marks w.e.f. 26th July 2022 to 28th July 2022, and further
asked to file application for obtaining photocopy of evaluated answer
books w.e.f. 8th August 2022 to 9th August 2022 and again further asked
to apply for re-evaluation w.e.f. 13th August 2022 to 14th August 2022.
The writ-petitioner being not satisfied with his marks in two subjects,
namely, Mathematics and Physics, filed an application bearing No.
H22435 against the mentioned notice dated 23rd July 2022.
3. It is the case of the Petitioner that after applying for the verification
of marks vide application no. H22435, he was regularly visiting the
website of the Respondent but could not find the result of his mentioned
application No. H22435 but suddenly on 25th August 2022, the petitioner
during the course of visiting the website of the respondent found
misleading contents upon the web page of the respondent. The contents of
the concerned page of online application were misleading and the
applicant could not proceed with the further steps i.e., filing application
for obtaining photocopy of the answer books and re-evaluation of answer
books.
4. The concerned page of online application was titled as "ON LINE
APPLICATION FOR RE-EVAULATION FOR EXAM 2021" instead of
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:PRAVEEN
KUMAR BABBAR
Signing Date:12.09.2022
18:02:23
"ON LINE APPLICATION FOR RE-EVAULATION FOR EXAM-2022".
This misleading content ultimately was reflecting that this page was for
the year of 2021 instead of 2022, and thereby the respondent ultimately
restrained the petitioner to press his legitimate rights.
5. The learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the act and
conduct of the Respondent is extremely irresponsible and the adamant
attitude of the Respondent ultimately can badly affect the career of the
petitioner, which cannot be allowed at any costs. Refusal on the part of
the Respondent to provide the photocopy of the evaluated answer sheets
of the Petitioner is ultimately in derogation of the fundamental rights of
the petitioner which are in furtherance of the spirit of the constitution of
India.
6. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondent
submitted that the writ-petitioner has applied after the last date of
submission when the window for applying for re-evaluation on the portal
was closed. He further submitted that ample opportunity with due notice
was given to all those who were interested in the said process.
7. Learned counsel for the Respondent has also argued that there is no
force in the submissions of the writ-petitioner that he was misled merely
due to wrong year being mentioned in the link of the portal. Even
otherwise such argument does not stand to reason as the writ-petitioner
has failed to bring forth any parallel instances wherein other students
have been misled as well.
8. Heard learned counsels for the Petitioner as well as the
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:PRAVEEN
KUMAR BABBAR
Signing Date:12.09.2022
18:02:23
Respondent. In my opinion, the present petition is misplaced as due
opportunity was given to the writ-petitioner to apply for re-evaluation
within the prescribed period. It is not disputed that the writ-petitioner has
applied for re-evaluation after the cut-off date which was set by the
Respondent. The writ-petitioner should have been more vigilant and
conscious about his rights and should have submitted the form for re-
evaluation on time.
9. Merely because there was a clerical error on the official website of
the Respondent does not attract the writ jurisdiction of this Court under
Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Only because of such a minor
error, the writ-petitioner cannot claim violation of his fundamental rights
in accordance with the spirit of the Constitution of India.
10. Therefore, the present writ petition fails being devoid of any merits
and is accordingly dismissed. Pending application also stands dismissed.
11. The judgment be uploaded on the website forthwith.
(CHANDRA DHARI SINGH)
JUDGE
SEPTEMBER 7, 2022
Aj/mg
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed By:PRAVEEN
KUMAR BABBAR
Signing Date:12.09.2022
18:02:23
