Smitha Menon P.I vs The Director
2021 Latest Caselaw 2470 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                               PRESENT

          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

     THURSDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 1ST MAGHA, 1942

                 RP.No.3 OF 2021 IN WP(C). 21949/2020

   AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 21949/2020(P) OF HIGH COURT OF
                              KERALA


REVIEW PETITIONER:

               SMITHA MENON P.I
               AGED 40 YEARS
               W/O.ANIKUTTAN, KESAVEEYAM, MAYITHARA P.O.,
               CHERTHALA SOUTH, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-688 539.

               BY ADV. SRI.P.P.BIJU

RESPONDENTS:

      1        THE DIRECTOR, GENERAL EDUCATION,
               JAGATHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 014.

      2        THE COMMISSIONER,
               OFFICE OF THE EXAMINATION COMMISSIONER, PAREEKSHA
               BHAVAN, POOJAPURA, THIRUVANANTHAURAM-695 012.

      3        THE SECRETARY,
               OFFICE OF THE EXAMINATION COMMISSIONER, PAREEKSHA
               BHAVAN, POOJAPURA, THIRUVANANTHAURAM-695 012.



               SRI. MATHEW GEORGE VADAKKEL - SR.GP

     THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION             ON
21.01.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
 RP.No.3/21 IN WP(C).21949/20            2

                                  ORDER

The petitioner has approached this Court

seeking review of the judgment dated

17/11/2020 in W.P(C)No.21949 of 2020,

asserting that the answer to Question No.72 in

Ext.P7 of the writ petition is "2017" and not

"2016", as has been found by this Court.

2. Shri.P.P.Biju, learned counsel for

the petitioner, relies on Annexure III answer

obtained by his client under the Right to

Information Act from the Office of the

Director of General Education on 19/11/2020,

to show that said Authority has recorded

therein that the project in question was

inaugurated in the year 2017 only. He,

therefore, prayed that the finding in the

judgment - that the project was - inaugurated

in the year 2016 - be vacated and his client

be granted one mark for that question.

3. Shri.P.P.Biju further submits that

his client is entitled to a further mark with

respect to the answer given for Question No.77

in Annexure V, because the correct answer

according to her is '(D)' and not '(B)' as

mentioned in the answer key.

4. In response, the learned Senior

Government Pleader - Shri.Mathew George

Vadakkel, submits that the correct answer to

Question No.72 in Ext.P7 is "2016" and that

the answer given to the petitioner in Annexure

III by the office of the Director of General

Education is in error. He added that an equiry

has already been ordered as to why such an

incorrect answer had been given and thus

prayed that this review petition be dismissed.

5. I am afraid that the attempt of the

petitioner through this review petition can

only be seem to be adventurous because; for

one, she concedes that she has lost the paper

by two marks and hence, even if this Court is

to accede to the first contention of hers

with respect to Question No.72 in Ext.P7, she

would only get one more mark. Her contention

regarding Question No.77 in Annexure V is

without any basis because if students are to

decide what is the correct answer to a

question, then there would be no purpose of

conducting an examination at all. In fact,

there was no challenge to the answer with

respect to Question No.77 in the writ

petition, or even while it was argued, but it

has been impelled for the first time in this

review petition and the petitioner asserts

that what is stated in the answer key is

wrong, while her assumption is right.

Ineluctably, therefore, this Court cannot

find favour with the petitioner; and I,

therefore, dismiss this review, finding the

contentions raised herein to be without

merit.

Sd/-

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

JUDGE

MC/23.1.2021 RP.No.3/21 IN WP(C).21949/20 5

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

ANNEXURE I CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 17.11.2020 IN WPC NO.21949/2020 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.

ANNEXURE II TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 09.11.2020 FILED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

ANNEXURE III TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 19.11.2020 ISSUED BY THE PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER, EDUCATION DEPARTMENT.

ANNEXURE IV TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 11.12.2020 ISSUED BY THE PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER, EDUCATION DEPARTMENT.

ANNEXURE V TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF THE QUESTION PAPER OF CATEGORY NO.1 PART NO.1.