Court No. - 35
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 19091 of 2019 Petitioner :- Anurag Yadav And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Rishi Kant Singh Chauhan,Ashok Khare Sr Advocate Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,M.N. Singh
Hon'ble Vivek Agarwal,J.
1. Sri Rishi Kant Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri M.N. Singh, learned counsel for respondent nos.2 and 3.
2. Sri Singh has brought copies of paper no.1 and paper no.2.
3. As far as paper no.2 is concerned, there is no quarrel that petitioners have been awarded marks for attempting all the three parts of question no.3, namely, 3-A, 3-B and 3-C. For which, they were respectively awarded 8, 5 and 15 marks, thus, totaling 28 marks. In fact, petitioner had attempted question 3-C in B notebook and marks have been awarded for attempting said question as is apparent from physical verification of the notebook produced by Sri M.N. Singh, learned counsel for respondents no.2 and 3.
4. Thus, Sri Rishi Kant Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners is satisfied that there is no anomaly in paper no.2 in regard to award of marks and their computation.
5. As far as paper no.1 is concerned, Sri Rishi Kant Singh has raised an objection in regard to award of zero marks in regard to question no.7-B.
6. However, after going through the notebook and being satisfied that no averment has been made in the petition that copies were not checked by the experts and, therefore, proper marking has not been made, petitioner is now estopped from raising plea of incompetency of the evaluators.
7. Thus, both on merits and an factual aspect of his answer books being not evaluated properly, petition fails and is dismissed.
8. Notebooks, in original, are returned to Sri M.N. Singh for onward transmission to the Commission.
Order Date :- 28.9.2021 Ravi/-