9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
The appeal challenges the order directing re-examination of an answer script in English Paper 1 of the Madhyamik Examination conducted by the West Bengal Council of Higher Secondary Education in 2004. Re-examination Order: The Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court directed re-examination of the respondent's answer script in English Paper 1, leading to an appeal by the Council-Appellant questioning the direction given by the Single Judge. The Division Bench dismissed the appeal, stating that the Judges themselves had inspected the answer script and were satisfied that re-assessment was warranted. Legal Sanctity: The appellant argued that the course adopted by the Single Judge and affirmed by the Division Bench lacked legal sanctity. The permissibility of re-assessment without statutory provision was discussed, citing previous cases where the Court held that finality in public examinations should not be disturbed without proper cause. Statutory Provision: The Court emphasized that in the absence of a statutory provision, re-assessment or re-examination of answer scripts should not be directed. It was noted that the examining body should follow fixed norms, and only in exceptional cases where evaluation deviates significantly from these norms should re-assessment be considered. Precedents and Principles: The judgment referred to previous cases such as Maharashtra State Board of Secondary and Higher Secondary Education v. Paritosh Bhupeshkumar Sheth, highlighting the importance of maintaining finality in public examination results. The Court reiterated that allowing revaluation as a matter of right could lead to uncertainty and confusion in the evaluation process. Settled Position in Law: Based on established legal principles, the orders of the Single Judge and the Division Bench directing re-examination were deemed unsustainable and quashed. The judgment emphasized the need for a robust evaluation system to maintain the integrity and finality of examination results. Observations in Suvankar's Case: In a related case, it was observed that public examination results should have a degree of finality to prevent uncertainty and maintain the integrity of the evaluation process. The Court cautioned against substituting its views for those of educational professionals with technical expertise. Conclusion: The appeal was allowed, and no costs were awarded. The judgment underscored the importance of upholding the integrity and finality of public examination results while respecting established legal principles regarding re-assessment of answer scripts.
|
