Kerala High Court

Evania S Palakkal vs The State Of Kerala on 28 June, 2022

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                            PRESENT
       THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
    TUESDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 7TH ASHADHA, 1944

                      WP(C) NO. 20703 OF 2022

PETITIONER:
              EVANIA S PALAKKAL
              AGED 17 YEARS
              MINOR, REPRESENTED BY HER FATHER,
              GUARDIAN, SHAISAN J.PALAKKAL,
              AGED 45 YEARS,
              S/O K V JOSE, PALAKKAL KOLLANNUR,
              PENGAMUKKU, VTC KATAKAMBAL,
              THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN-680544.

              BY ADVS.
              BABU S. NAIR
              SMITHA BABU

RESPONDENTS:

    1         THE STATE OF KERALA
              REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
              DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION,
              GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM, PIN-695001.

    2         THE DIRECTOR OF GENERAL EDUCATION
              DIRECTORATE OF GENERAL EDUCATION,
              HIGHER SECONDARY WING, HOUSING BOARD BUILDING,
              SHANTHI NAGAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695001.

    3         BETHANY ST.JOHN'S ENGLISH HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL
              KUNNAMKULAM, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN-680503,
              REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL.

    4         THE TREASURY OFFICER
              SUB TREASURY, KUNNAMKULAM,
              THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN-680503.

           SMT ANIMA M, GOVERNMENT PLEADER
     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 28.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 20703 OF 2022

                                     2


                                JUDGMENT

The petitioner, a minor student, has approached this Court through her

guardian challenging Ext.P3 Circular dated 21.6.2022 issued by the 2nd

respondent insofar as it states that for those subjects of the Plus Two

Examination, 2022 in respect of which double valuation was carried out,

there shall not be any revaluation and scrutiny. She has also sought for

issuance of a direction to the respondents to accept the application for

revaluation for the subjects, Physics, Chemistry and Mathematics.

2. The petitioner states that she pursued her Plus Two course at

the 3rd respondent school and appeared for the examinations for the year

2022. She asserts that she is very studious and had scored good marks for

Physics, Chemistry, and Mathematics during the 1st year examinations.

However, when Plus Two results were announced, she was shocked to find

that she had secured very low marks for the written examination. Reliance is

placed on Ext.P2 result sheet to substantiate her contention. In the said

circumstances, an application for revaluation of the answer sheets except

Hindi was submitted. However, the Principal, relying on Ext.P3 circular, did

not accept the application on the ground that no revaluation or scrutiny can

be done in respect of those subjects where double valuation was conducted. WP(C) NO. 20703 OF 2022

According to the petitioner, Ext.P3 Circular would go against Ext.P4 Manual of

Higher Secondary Examination Rules, 2022 issued by the Department of

Higher Secondary Education as there is no similar interdiction in the Manual.

It is in the afore circumstances, that this writ petition is filed seeking the

following reliefs:

(i) call for the records leading to Exhibit P3 and quash the same to the extent of denying revaluation and scrutiny of answer scripts of Physics, Chemistry and Mathematics

(ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writs, orders or directions commanding the respondents to accept the application form and prescribed fee from the petitioner for the revaluation of Physics, chemistry and Mathematics.

3. When the matter had come up for consideration on 24.06.2022,

this Court had passed the following order:

" Smt.Smitha Babu, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is a brilliant student, who had secured excellent marks in her Higher Secondary Examinations-2022. But when the Plus-Two results were announced, she found that the marks awarded to her is perilously low and not commensurate with the marks obtained by her for the 1st year examination. According to the petitioner, though an application for revaluation was submitted, the same was not accepted in view of Ext.P3 circular dated 21.06.2022 wherein it is stated that there cannot be any revaluation for the subjects Physics, Chemistry and Mathematics. The learned counsel submits that the last date for applying for revaluation is 27.06.2022 and therefore she WP(C) NO. 20703 OF 2022

prays for issuance of an interim direction to accept the application, pending further consideration of the writ petition.

The learned Government Pleader points out that the assertions made by the petitioner in the writ petition are not correct. According to the learned Government Pleader, in Chapter IV of Ext.P4 Manual of Higher Secondary Examinations, it has been stated in unequivocal terms that answer scripts of the 2nd year Physics, Chemistry and Mathematics would be subjected to double valuation. Reference is also made by the Government Pleader to Chapter 6 Clause 5 of Ext. P4 Manual and it is submitted that the application for revaluation/scrutiny of answer scripts that have undergone double evaluation shall not be permitted. According to the learned Government Pleader, the assertions made by the petitioner that Ext.P3 circular was arbitrarily issued after the examinations cannot be sustained. The learned Government Pleader also pointed out that all that the petitioner has sought for is to quash Ext.P3 and no challenge has been mounted against the Examination Manual which contains the relevant provisions.

4. Though I find considerable merits in the submissions of the learned Government Pleader, pending further consideration of the writ petition, as an interim measure, there will be a direction to the respondents to accept the application form and prescribed fee from the petitioner for revaluation of the subjects Physics, Chemistry and Mathematics. It is made clear that the above direction is purely provisional in nature and the petitioner shall not claim any equity based on the above interim order.

5. I find from Ext.P3 circular, dated 21.06.2022, that though revaluation is not permitted for Physics, Chemistry and Mathematics, the student is held entitled to photocopies of the answer sheets. Let the respondents produce the photocopies of the answer sheets in a sealed cover before this Court on 28.06.2022"

WP(C) NO. 20703 OF 2022

4. In tune with the directions issued by this Court, the Government

Pleader handed over the answer sheets in a sealed cover. A perusal of the

answer sheets reveals that both the valuers have granted more or less the

same marks to the petitioner. I do not find any discrepancy as alleged by the

petitioner in the writ petition. Furthermore, the assertion of the petitioner

that the Circular goes against the provisions of the Manual cannot be

sustained as clause (5) of the Manual which provides for

revaluation/scrutiny/photocopy clearly says that the revaluation facility shall

only be available for single valuation subjects. The Manual has been brought

out after deliberations by experts in the education field and teachers, and it

would not be possible for this Court to interfere with the same, particularly

when none of the provisions have been challenged in this writ petition. Of

course, when the matter was taken up for hearing, Smt.Smitha Babu, the

learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that I.A.No.1/2022

has been filed seeking amendment of the writ petition. I do not think in the

facts and circumstances, any relief can be granted to the petitioner.

5. I find that the petitioner is entitled to photocopies of the answer

sheets as per the Manual. Smt. Smitha Babu, the learned counsel appearing

for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner shall apply for a copy of the WP(C) NO. 20703 OF 2022

answer sheets and if any discrepancy is noted, the petitioner be permitted to

submit a representation before the Director to highlight the injustice caused

to the student.

6. Having considered the entire facts, I do not find that the

petitioner has made out any case for interference. However, before parting,

it is made clear that if the petitioner submits a representation before the 2nd

respondent raising her grievances, the same shall be considered and a

decision shall be taken with notice to the petitioner or her authorized

representative, expeditiously, in any event, within a period of six weeks from

the date of production of a copy of this judgment.

Sd/-

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V JUDGE

avs WP(C) NO. 20703 OF 2022

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

Exhibit P1           TRUE COPY OF THE SCORE SHEET OF THE
                     PETITIONER IN PLUS ONE FOR THE YEAR 2021,
                     ANNOUNCED ON 27.11.2021.

Exhibit P2           TRUE COPY OF THE RESULT OF THE PETITIONER
                     IN PLUS TWO EXAMINATION 2022 DATED
                     21.06.2022.

Exhibit P3           TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR ISSUED BY THE
                     2ND RESPONDENT DATED, 21.06.2022 AS
                     NO.EX.V(1)8458/2022/+2RV/DGE.

Exhibit P4           TRUE COPY OF THE CHAPTER 4 OF THE
                     REGULATIONS (MANUAL OF HIGHER SECONDARY
                     EXAMINATIONS ISSUED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF
                     HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION 2002.

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:
                      NIL